Conditioned Synthetic Data Generation in Computer-Based Reasoning Systems

ABSTRACT

Techniques for synthetic data generation in computer-based reasoning systems are discussed and include receiving a request for generation of synthetic data based on a set of training data cases. One or more focal training data cases are determined. For undetermined features (either all of them or those that are not subject to conditions), a value for the feature is determined based on the focal cases. In some embodiments, the generation of synthetic data may be conditioned on values of features, preserved features, such as unique identifiers, previous-in-time features, and using the other techniques discussed herein.

BENEFIT CLAIM

This application is continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser.No. 16/713,714, filed Dec. 13, 2019, which is in turn acontinuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/219,476,filed Dec. 13, 2018. This application also claims priority to and thebenefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/036,741 filed Jun.9, 2020 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/024,152 filed May13, 2020. Each of the applications identified above is herebyincorporated by reference herein in its entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to computer-based reasoning systems andmore specifically to synthetic data in computer-based reasoning systems.

BACKGROUND

Computer-based reasoning systems can be used to predict outcomes basedon input data. For example, given a set of input data, aregression-based machine learning system can predict an outcome or makea decision. Computer-based reasoning systems will likely have beentrained on much training data in order to generate its reasoning model.It will then predict the outcome or make a decision based on thereasoning model.

One of the hardest problems for computer-based reasoning systems is,however, the acquisition of training data. Some systems may requiremillions or more sets of training data in order to properly train asystem. Further, even when the computer-based reasoning system hasenough data to use to train the computer-based reasoning system, thatdata may not be anonymous or anonymized in a way that satisfies userexpectation, terms of service, etc. Other systems require the rightsampling of training data. For example, even though a pump may spend 99%of its time in proper operating modes with similar data, acomputer-based reasoning system to control it may need significantlymore training on the potential failure scenarios with unusual data thatcomprise the other 1% of the operation time. Additionally, the trainingdata may not be appropriate for use in reinforcement learning becausesignificant amounts of data may be required in certain parts of theknowledge space or because the high costs associated with acquiring datasuch that the sampling process must be very selective.

The techniques herein overcome these issues.

The approaches described in this section are approaches that could bepursued, but not necessarily approaches that have been previouslyconceived or pursued. Therefore, unless otherwise indicated, it shouldnot be assumed that any of the approaches described in this sectionqualify as prior art merely by virtue of their inclusion in thissection.

SUMMARY

The claims provide a summary of the invention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

In the drawings:

FIG. 1A, FIG. 1B, FIG. 1C and FIG. 1D are flow diagrams depictingexample processes for synthetic data generation in computer-basedreasoning systems.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram depicting example systems for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems.

FIG. 3 is a block diagram of example hardware for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram depicting example processes for controllingsystems.

FIG. 5 is an image showing examples of a join between two tables.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the following description, for the purposes of explanation, numerousspecific details are set forth in order to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the present invention. It will be apparent, however,that the present invention may be practiced without these specificdetails. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shownin block diagram form in order to avoid unnecessarily obscuring thepresent invention.

GENERAL OVERVIEW

The techniques herein provide for synthetic data generation based incomputer-based reasoning systems. In some embodiments, thecomputer-based reasoning is a case-based reasoning system. As discussedelsewhere herein, computer-based reasoning systems need extensive, andoften specific training data. It can be prohibitively expensive and timeconsuming to create such training data. Further, in numerous situations,including in the context of reinforcement learning, the specifictraining data needed to properly train a computer-based reasoning modelmay be difficult or impossible to obtain. Training is often needed onrare, but important, scenarios, which are costly, difficult, ordangerous to create, and, as such, that training data may not beavailable. The techniques herein use existing training data and,optionally, target surprisal to create synthetic data. In someembodiments, conditions may also be applied to the creation of thesynthetic data in order to ensure that training data meeting specificconditions is created. For undetermined features, a distribution for thefeature among the training cases is determined, and a value for thefeature is determined based on that distribution. In some embodiments,the values for some features are determined based at least in part onthe conditions or condition requirements that are placed on thesynthetic data. In some embodiments, the features that have conditionson them are called “conditioned features.” As used herein, the term“undetermined features” encompasses its plain and ordinary meaning,including, but not limited to those features for which a value has notyet been determined, and for which there is no condition or conditionalrequirement. For example, in those embodiments or instances where thereare no conditions on the synthesized data, all of the features mayinitially be undetermined features. After a value for a feature isdetermined, it is no longer an undetermined feature, but instead (asdescribed herein) may be used to as part of determining subsequentundetermined features.

In some embodiments, the undetermined features may be conditioned onprevious values (where “previous values” may also be termed“previous-in-time values”) of the same variable. For example, a knownprevious value of a currently-undetermined feature may, in certainembodiments, be useful in determining the current (and possibly later)value(s) for that feature. These may be called time series values ortime series features. For example, the price of a property may vary overtime, and may be related to the value at a previous time (or previoustimes). As another example, the position of a vehicle may be related toone or more previous positions of the vehicle. Generated synthetic datafor property price and vehicle positions may each be conditioned on theprevious value of the property price or vehicle position, respectively.The same could apply to any other example of generation of values forundetermined features herein. Further, as noted herein, the value of anundetermined feature may be conditioned on two or more previous values,or on the first derivative, second derivative, or higher orderderivatives. For example, if a vehicle (such as a plane) is in freefall, then it may be useful to condition position on two or moreprevious values in order to better represent the acceleration due togravity.

In some embodiments, two or more undetermined values may be conditionedon the values (for one or more time periods) of previous values orderivatives with regard to other values. For example, turning back tothe vehicle example, the value for each position axis (X, Y, and Z)could be conditioned on all of the values of (X, Y, and Z). Conditioningon previous value(s) or derivatives of two or more features may beuseful when in order to capture a multidimensional relationship betweenthe undetermined features and the previous value(s) of the two or morefeatures.

In some embodiments, the time periods for the previous value (e.g., thetimestep back to the previous value) can be any appropriate time period,such as one millisecond, two seconds, four minutes, three days, etc.Further, in some embodiments, all of the time periods are equal, and inothers, the time periods differ (among undetermined features) and/orfrom one time step to another. Further, in some embodiments, the valuesfor undetermined features are conditioned on functions or curves relatedto the value over time. For example, the value for an undeterminedfeature could be conditioned on a curve fitted to the previous 2 (ormore) values for the undetermined feature.

In some embodiments, all of the features of a case could be conditionedon previous values or derivatives of the features. For example, usingthe position example, if the only features in the case were the (X, Y,Z) axis components of position, then all of those features might varywith time. In some embodiments, a subset of the features for a casemight vary with time. For example, the price of a property might beconditioned on previous price of the property, but the square footage ofthe lot might not vary over time, and therefore may not be conditionedon previous values for the square footage of the lot.

In some embodiments, multiple time series can be included together basedon one or more identifiers or features that group the time series datatogether. Such groups of time series together are sometimes referred toas panel data. Data may be synthesized based on one or more time seriesor conditioned upon specific attributes of one or more time series.Further, some data sets may include time series that have only one oronly two data points. In such data sets, a stationary distribution maybe used to model those isolated data points and capture theirrepresentation in the synthesized panel data.

In some embodiments, feature bounds associated with the feature or anyof its derivatives can be used to generate the value for the feature(e.g., using the techniques discussed herein). As particular examples,the feature value may be sampled based on a uniform distribution,truncated normal, or any other bounded parametric or nonparametricdistribution, between the feature bounds. In some embodiments, if thefeature bounds are not used to generate the values, then the techniquesherein include checking feature bounds (if any have been specified,determined, or are otherwise known) of the value determined for thefeature. In some embodiments, if feature bounds are known for a specificfeature, and the value determined for that feature is outside thefeature bounds, then corrective action can be taken. Corrective actioncan include one or more of re-determining a value for the feature, andoptionally again checking the new value against the feature bounds,choosing a value within the range of the feature bounds, replacing thedetermined value with a new value determined based on a distributionjust within the feature bounds (e.g., a uniform, normal, or otherdistribution within the feature bounds), and/or the like. As aparticular example, feature bounds may be used for time seriesvelocities (discussed elsewhere herein).

In many embodiments or contexts, it may be important for synthetic dataand/or synthetic training data to differ from the existing trainingdata. As used herein, the phrase synthetic data may be used in certainplaces and the phrase synthetic training data may be used in otherplaces, and the two phrases may be interchangeable. The techniques applyequally regardless of whether the phrase synthetic training data orsynthetic data is used. As such, where the phrase synthetic trainingdata is used, the techniques apply equally to synthetic data, andvice-versa. As an example of the importance of the importance ofsynthetic data differing from the training data, it may be useful tohave the synthetic data not contain identical data cases as the originaltraining data or even data cases that are overly “similar” or “close” tooriginal training data cases. As such, in the event that synthetic datais identical or too similar to existing training data, the syntheticdata case may be modified (e.g., resampled) and retested, or discarded.In some embodiments, the generated synthetic data may be comparedagainst the at least a portion of the existing training data, and adetermination may be made whether to keep the synthetic data case basedon the distance of the synthetic data case to one or more elements of inthe existing training data. For example, in some embodiments, eachsynthetic data case generated using the techniques herein are comparedto the existing training data in order to determine whether it is overly“similar” to existing training data. Determining whether the syntheticdata case is overly similarity to a training case may be accomplished,in some embodiments, by determining the shortest distance between thesynthetic data case and the data cases in the training data. In otherembodiments, the distance is determined between time series data, suchas between a synthesized time series and any or all candidate originaltime series data, either as a generalized mean distance of all of thetime series points (including arithmetic mean, geometric mean, harmonicmean, maximum distance, and minimum distance), earth-mover metrics,entropy, pattern or shape comparisons, and/or other distance ordistance-like measures. If the shortest distance is below a certainthreshold, then the synthetic data case is deemed to be too “close” toan existing case. In the event that the synthetic data case is overlysimilar to an existing training case, the synthetic data case may bediscarded, or values for one or more features may be redetermined andthen the modified synthetic data case may be tested for similarity tothe synthetic data cases. Any appropriate measure, metric, or premetricdiscussed herein may be used to determine the “distance” or “closeness”of the synthetic case with other cases, including Euclidean distance,Minkowski distance, Damerau—Levenshtein distance, Kullback-Leiblerdivergence, l-Kronecker delta, cosine similarity, Jaccard index,Tanimoto similarity, and/or any other distance measure, metric,pseudometric, premetric, index, etc. Further, the distance measure maybe based on all of the features of the cases, or on a subset of thefeatures. For example, the distance measure may be based on a subset offeatures that, for example, are known to be combinable as identifiers ofindividuals. Additionally, in some embodiments, the closeness ofsynthetic data cases is determined as the synthetic data cases aregenerated, after many or all of the synthetic data cases are generated,or a combination of the two.

In some embodiments, the techniques may include determining thek-anonymity, t-closeness, l-diversity, and/or other privacy measures forsynthetic data cases (e.g., either as the synthetic data cases aregenerated, after many or all the synthetic data cases are generated, ora combination of the two) (e.g., as part of determining validity 152,fitness 160, and/or similarity 160 in FIGS. 1A, 1B, and/or 1C). In someembodiments, determining the k-anonymity or t-closeness of a syntheticdata case may include determining whether there are k or more trainingdata cases that are “close” to the synthetic data case (e.g., within athreshold distance—e.g., a “similarity threshold”), and, if there are atleast k training data cases that are “close”, keeping the synthetic datacase because one would not be able to associate the synthetic data casewith less than k possible training data cases. In some embodiments, ifthere is at least one training data case, but fewer than k training datacases, that are within the similarity threshold of the synthetic datacase, then the synthetic data case may be discarded, or values for oneor more features may be redetermined and then the modified syntheticdata case may be tested for similarity and/or k-anonymity and/ort-closeness to the synthetic data cases. In some embodiments, even ifthere are k or more training data cases that are within the similaritythreshold distance of the synthetic data case, if one or more of thetraining data cases are within a closer threshold distance to thesynthetic data case, then the synthetic data case may be discarded, orvalues for one or more features or data elements in a time series may beredetermined and then the modified synthetic data case may be tested forsimilarity and/or k-anonymity to the synthetic data cases. This may beuseful, for example, to avoid having one of the k or more training datacases be overly similar to the synthetic data case such that thesynthetic data case and one or more of the training data cases are orare nearly identical. For example, if a synthetic data case is identicalto one of the training cases, even if there are k other training casesthat are similar, it may still be useful to exclude that case.

The number k used in k anonymity may be set by the users of the systemor be automatically set based on desired anonymity, and may be relatedor unrelated to the “k” used for kNN searching. Further, the number kcan be any appropriate number, such as 1, 2, 9, 101, 1432, etc. Thenumber k can be the expected value of the number of data elements, theminimum number of elements that could be associated with a given point,or some other generalization of expectation including harmonic mean andgeometric mean.

In some embodiments, the distance t for t-closeness may be set by theusers of the system or be automatically set based on uncertaintyenvelopes or confidence measures of the data including expected residualvalues, on ratios of uncertainty measures of the data including expectedresidual values, on distance measures, on information theoretic orsurprisal measures, or other distance or similarity measures betweendata elements.

In some embodiments, the distribution for a feature may be perturbedbased on target surprisal and/or conviction. In some embodiments, thedistribution for a feature may be perturbed based on a multiplicity ofsurprisal or confidence values, including surprisal or confidencerelated to model residuals and the similarity or distance to existingpoints. In some embodiments, generated synthetic data may be tested forfitness. In some embodiments, generated synthetic data may be used as asampling process to obtain observations about unknown parts of thecomputer-based reasoning model and to update the model based on the newinformation obtained. In some embodiments, generated synthetic data maybe used as a sampling process that conditions the requests to increasethe likelihood of the system it is driving attaining a goal. Further,the generated synthetic data may be provided in response to a request,used to train a computer-based reasoning model, and/or used to causecontrol of a system.

General Overview of Preserved Features and Synthesizing Table Data

In some embodiments, conditioning values is accomplished by preservingvalues for one or more features (“preserved features”) from the set oftraining data to the synthesized data. The term “preserved feature” mayhave its plain and ordinary meaning, including, but not limited to afeature for which a value is preserved from a corresponding value of acase in the set of training date. The preserved features may beindicated in a request received for data synthesis, chosen based onmetadata related to the column (e.g., that it is a unique identifier fortable training data), pre-programmed into an embodiment, etc. In someembodiments, when a feature value is preserved, a case may be selected(e.g., based on conditioning, randomly, each case may be selected inturn, the cases may be sorted in some way and then selected, and/orusing any of the techniques herein, etc.), and the value for thepreserved feature from that training data case may be used as the valuefor the feature in the synthetic data case. In some embodiments, eachcase from the set of training data may be used (e.g., created asynthetic data case based on the preserved value from each training datacase), and the value for the preserved feature from each of those casesmay be used to populate the value for the corresponding features in thesynthetic data cases, in which case, there would be a 1:1 correspondencein the numbers of cases in the set of training data and the syntheticdata. Fewer than all of the cases from the set of training data may alsobe used as sources for values for the preserved feature data.Additionally, in some embodiments, values outside of the training setmay be specified and used for the preserved feature data. In someembodiments, cases from the set of training data may be used more thanonce, and more, equal to, or less than the number of the cases in theset of training data as values for preserved features in the syntheticdata, which may be described as “sampling with replacement”. Further, insome embodiments more than one value per case may be preserved for thesynthetic data (e.g., an age feature and a gender feature), andpreserving features may be used with any other technique herein (e.g.,conditioning on previous-in-time values, conditioning on values,conditioning, etc.). Preserving values may be useful in order to havethose preserved values influence the determination of the values forother features in the synthetic data case. Further, it may be useful topreserve features when there is a hierarchical or other relationshipamong data that can be preserved and/or emulated by preserving thevalues of the preserved features.

In some embodiments, after the synthetic data generation is complete,the preserved value may be changed or replaced globally. This may beuseful, for example, when the preserved value has sensitivity to it,such as containing confidential, personal, or other sensitiveinformation. In some embodiments, after the synthetic generation iscomplete, the preserved value may be changed based on some condition,for example, if there is only one entry with a given family name, orchanged to a different actual or fictitious name that is likely to befound in the country indicated by other features.

In some embodiments, the techniques, including the use of preservedfeatures, can be used to synthesize data from tables. For example, sometables include a unique identifier or “UID” in each row of the table,and the UIDs can be preserved as discussed herein. The UIDs aretypically nominals (e.g., represented using integers or uniquelygenerated string IDs such as UUIDs), where the term nominal encompassesits plain and ordinary meaning that it represents a name, or is used toidentify something, and does not act as a value or position. In someembodiments, this means that differing UIDs are all equidistant fromeach other. For example, a UID of 402 is the same distance (e.g., adistance of “1”) from 401, as it is from UID 7, UID 114 and UID 986, andeach of those UIDs are also the same “1” distance from each other. Insome embodiments, tables may be generated by conditioning eachsynthesized data case based on a UID (e.g., one synthesized data case(table row) for each UID, one table row for some of the UIDs, or onetable row or more for some or all of the UIDs, etc., as discussedherein). The techniques may operate such that, in selecting the Knearest neighbors or focal cases (discussed extensively herein), thedata case from the set of training data that has the same UID is part ofthe set of K nearest neighbors or focal cases. This may occur becauseconditioning on the UID results in the distance to the training datacase with that same UID is zero, and the distance to all other trainingdata cases with the UID being the same (e.g., “1”). As such, thetraining data case with the same UID would be in the set of focal casesand the remaining K data cases will, in some embodiments, represent arandom selection of data cases from the set of training data cases. Thevalue for first undetermined feature of the synthetic data case isdetermined based on the focal cases (discussed extensively herein). Thatvalue for the undetermined feature will be “influenced” by the trainingdata case with the same UID, but will not (necessarily) have preciselythe same value as the training data case with the same UID for thatfeature. As discussed extensively herein, subsequent undeterminedfeatures will be conditioned on the previous conditions and previousdetermined feature values. For example, the second undetermined featurewill be conditioned on the UID and the value for the first undeterminedfeature. Therefore, the influence on subsequent values for undeterminedfeatures of the synthetic data case with the same UID may be present inboth the UID and the influence for the determined value(s) for thefeatures in the synthetic data case.

In some embodiments, not only does conditioning on the UID may allow forcreation of values in a single table of synthetic data, but it alsoallows for preserving relationships across tables. For example, somedatabases have multiple tables, and entries in those tables may berelated by UIDs. For example, a first table may include patientdemographics and have a UID that is unique for each patient. A secondtable may include information about billing for that patient, andinclude the same UID, thereby allowing reference to the first table. Athird table may include information about patient visits and include thesame UID to identify the patient, thereby allowing reference to thefirst and second tables. The use of the same UID across tables allowsthe tables to be used together (e.g., by using a table JOIN). Whengenerating data based on multiple tables, the data synthesized for eachtable may be conditioned on the UIDs. As such, first, the relationshipsbetween tables will be preserved, and the training data associated withthe UID will influence the synthesis of data for each table as discussedherein. In some embodiments, this may be useful when it is desired thatthe synthetic data generated (e.g., multiple tables) mimic the tableproperties of the set of training data cases (e.g., multiple tables). Insome embodiments, synthetic data may be conditioned on two or more UIDsin a single table. For example, the set of the tables with patient datadescribed above may include the second table having the UID to identifythe patient entry in the first table (call that UID1, which would beunique in table one), and a UID for each billing event (UID2, whichwould be unique in table two). In table two, there may be multiplebilling entries per patient. Therefore, there may be multiple UID2s foreach UID1. In other examples, this could include more levels ofhierarchy (e.g., three or more UIDs per row). In some embodiments, thesynthesis of data may be conditioned on each set of UIDs. For example,the values for undetermined features for the synthetic data case may beconditioned on UID1[i] and UID2[j], where each UID1[i] may be associatedwith one or more UID2[j]s (and where j may range from 1 . . . number ofrows that contain UID1[i]). The determination of values for undeterminedfeatures would then be performed as discussed herein.

In some embodiments, synthetic data cases may be generated for eachtable, for each UID (or set of UIDs). This may be beneficial when asynthetic data set of similar size to the set of training data cases isdesired. In some embodiments, UIDs from the set of training data casesmay be chosen at random, and a smaller, same, or greater number ofsynthetic data cases can be synthesized as compared to the set oftraining data. Further, in some embodiments, the number of times a UIDmay be used for data synthesis may be limited to one (e.g., to keep eachunique), to the number of times that the UID appears in thecorresponding table in the set of training data cases (e.g., to preservea similar set of relationships in the synthetic data cases), or to anyother appropriate number (e.g., higher than one time for each UID, orbased on the distribution of the original data). Further, in someembodiments, there may be no limit on the reuse of UIDs to generatesynthetic data. Further still, the limitations on the reuse of UIDswithing any individual table of synthetic data may differ per table (orper UID).

In some embodiments, a single given UID may be used as the basis tosynthesize multiple new IDs, which may be described as “sampling withreplacement”. In these embodiments, the one-to-one relationship betweenoriginal data and synthetic data may not exist even though the UIDsremain unique, yet relationships may be preserved relative to the UIDs,and, instead of using the same UID on each case generated based on thatsingle UID, separate or different UIDs may be used for these synthesizedcases for use with matching with other tables.

Some UIDs may simply be a sequence of integers with no particular value.UIDs could also be something more unique, such as the social securitynumber of a person. For this reason and others, in some embodiments,after the data is synthesized conditioned on UIDs, the UIDs may bechanged. For example, if the UIDs in the synthesized data are the sameas in the set of training data cases, then the UIDs may be globallychanged (in all tables) in order to avoid any residual identifyinginformation that may exist in the UID. The change would preserve therelationships among the tables in the synthetic data by changing allinstances of UID[i] to UID[i]′. Further, as discussed elsewhere herein,in the event that synthetic data is identical or too similar to existingtraining data (e.g., as measured by one of the measures discussedherein), the synthetic data case may be modified (e.g., resampled) andretested, discarded, and/or replaced.

In some embodiments, the techniques may include determining “links”(see, e.g., links 511-516 in FIG. 5 ) based on possible joins among twoor more tables in a database and using those links in order to determineone or more conditions used in generation of data. For example, thelinks may be used in order to determine the probability distribution ofpreserved values (e.g., UIDs) in a particular table. Stated another way,in some embodiments, the techniques include selecting or generating datasuch as a UID based on a weighted sampling across the tables, and thisselection or generation may be informed by the relationships that joinmultiple tables. For example, if a particular join between two or moretables is common and yields a large representation of a particular UID(a large number of links 511-516), then that UID may be resampled orreused more than a UID that is less frequently represented in the links511-516. As used herein, the term “link” may represent overlap ofcorresponding values (e.g., UIDs) from table to table. As depicted inFIG. 5 , a link 511-516 may represent, for a particular join, theoccurrence of overlap between matched values in particular columns oftwo (or more) tables (e.g., preserved features, unique IDs, or UIDs).

In some embodiments, a set of two or more possible joins and/or knownjoins (corresponding to two or more sets of links) may be used in orderto determine the conditioning (e.g., based on those two or more sets oflinks among tables) for the data to be generated. As one example, a setof queries containing joins, may be used it its entirety, or partially(e.g., by randomly sampling, or by ranking joins by the most commonqueries first and choosing the N most common joins), in order todetermine the conditioning for the UIDs (or other preserved values). Asanother example, the techniques may also include sampling across allpossible joins for a set of tables in order to determine theconditioning of the UIDs (or other values shared across tables). Thenumber of possible joins in a set of tables (whether a database or acomponent of a database) may be very large. So, in some embodiments, itmay be beneficial to sample among those possible joins in order todetermine a set of joins for conditioning for the UID or other preservedvalue. Additionally, the set of possible joins may be selected based ona representative distribution of possible joins. As a specific example,consider a set of known queries where 10% of queries join 2 tables, 80%join 3 tables, and 10% join 4 tables. The techniques may includesampling all possible queries based on that distribution (e.g., joining2, 3, or 4 tables based on that distributions). Further, in someembodiments, a combination of any of the above may be used. For example,some known queries (and their joins) may be used, and some joins may besampled from all possible joins (based on the distribution of joins ornot). In some embodiments, known queries may be those known to be usedto query a database (whether known from log files, user specification,etc.). In various embodiments, the weighting for calculating conditionsbased on links may be based on an equal weighting from all joins used tocreate the links, or the contribution of the joins to the conditioningcould be weighted differently. For example, joins based on known queries(or joins) may have heavier weights (like 1.5, 2, 9, 17 times the weightof other joins, and/or based on any known frequency of such knownqueries or joins) than joins that are sampled from the space of allpossible joins. When sampling from the set of possible joins, the typesof joins used may be any appropriate join or combination of joins (suchas inner join, outer join, left join, right join, cross join, naturaljoin, equi-join, etc.) and may use one or more columns to form compoundor composite keys when joining tables.

Consider the particular example in FIG. 5 where Table A 501 has a columnU1, and Table B 502 has a corresponding column U1, with the valuesdepicted. If an embodiment were to generate synthetic data solely basedon Table 501 without taking into account the effects of joins (depictedas links 511-516 between corresponding values in Table A and Table B):there may be a 75% chance of generating U1 “1”, and a 25% chance ofgenerating a U1 of “2”. If an embodiment were to generate synthetic datasolely based on Table 502 without taking into account the effects ofjoins: there would be a 25% chance of generating U1 1, and a 75% chanceof generating a U1 of 2.

Continuing the example, in some embodiments, the techniques includeconditioning generation of data for a table (e.g., table 501 or 502 ofFIG. 5 ), based on the effects of joining tables (e.g., links 511-516).For example, those values with more links among tables may be morelikely to be generated. As a particular example, if the links 511-516are used to condition the generation of U1 (in either table 501 or502—or elsewhere), and the weighting for the links are all equal, thenthere is an equal weighting for each value of U1 (“1” and “2”) sincethere are three links 511-516 for each of values “1” and “2”. Restated:there would be a 50% probability of generating either “1” or “2” for U1in that example.

In some embodiments, the techniques include using the number of links511-516 in combination with the occurrence of the U1 in the originaltable(s). For example, using the example in FIG. 5 , new synthetic datamay be generated with U1 values “1” and “2” based on conditions, andthose conditions may be determined based just on the occurrence of theU1 in the table 501 or 502 alone (describe elsewhere herein), based onthe join sampling weight (50% each for “1” and “2” based on number oflinks—with three for each of “1” and “2”— described above), or acombination of the two. As an example of the latter, the conditioningvalues may be combined based on averaging the probabilities from thetable in question. Specifically, for table 501, combining theprobability of U1 values from table 501 with the link 511-516percentages, the likelihoods may be ((50%+75%)/2=62.5% for U1 “1”; and(25%+50%)/2=37.5% for U1=“2”), or any other appropriate method.

The techniques herein primarily discusses uses on databases ordatastores, and, even if not stated specifically in each example andembodiment, the techniques apply equally to sets of connected tables(sometimes called “components”) of databases or connected data setswithin datastores. A single database or datastore may be comprised ofone or more components, and the techniques herein apply to components ofdatabases or datastores, as well as to sets of components of databasesor datastores, and to databases or datastores, regardless of number ofcomponents.

Example Processes for Synthetic Data Generation

FIG. 1A is a flow diagram depicting example processes for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems. In some embodiments,process 100 proceeds by receiving 110 a request for synthetic data. Forexample, a system or system operator may request additional or differenttraining data in order to train a computer-based reasoning that will beused to control a system. In some cases, the system or operator mayrequest anonymous data that is similar to a current training data set(or different from, but still anonymized). In other cases, the system oroperator may require more data than is in the current training data set,and therefore may request additional data to augment the currenttraining data set. In some cases, synthetic data may be requested todirect sampling via a reinforcement learning process. The synthesizeddata (perhaps combined with original training data or by itself) may beused as part of a computer-based reasoning system to cause control of asystem. Many controllable systems can be controlled with the techniquesherein, such as controllable machinery, autonomous vehicles, labequipment, etc. In some embodiments, the request for synthetic data mayinclude a target surprisal and/or conviction for the target data. Insome embodiments, if low target surprisal is requested, then thesynthetic data may be close to and not differ much from existing data.If high target surprisal is requested, then the generated synthetic datamay differ much from the existing data.

The request can be received 110 in any appropriate manner, such as viaHTTP, HTTPS, FTP, FTPS, a remote procedure call, an API, a function orprocedure call, etc. The request can be formatted in any appropriateway, including in a structured format, such as HTML, XML, or aproprietary format or in a format acceptable by the API, remoteprocedure call, or function or procedure call. As one example, therequest may be received 110 by a training and analysis system 210 in themanner discussed above.

In some embodiments, optionally, the received 110 request for syntheticdata may also include one or more conditions for the synthetic data.These conditions may be restrictions on the generated synthetic data.For example, if the synthetic data being generated is for a checkersgame, a condition on the data may be that includes only moves that arepart of a winning strategy, that survive for at least S moves withoutlosing, and/or win within W moves. Another set of conditions on thesynthetic data may be a particular board layout (e.g., the startingcheckers game state, the current checkers game state), etc.

When the received 110 request includes one or more conditions for thesynthetic data, the closest cases to the conditions may be determined120 as focal cases. In some embodiments, the closest cases to theconditions may be determined as the K nearest neighbors (KNN) for theconditions (e.g., the K cases that are “closest” to meeting theconditions). For example, if there are two features that haveconditions, A and B, and the conditions are A=3 and B=5, then the KNNfor the conditions would be those cases that are closest to meeting theconditions of A=3 and B=5. In some instances, if there are more than Kcases that fully meet the condition (e.g., there are more than K casesthat have feature values of A=3 and B=5, which scenario will be morecommon if the conditions are on features which are nominal orcategorical), then K cases may be selected from those cases meeting thecondition. These K cases may be selected from among those that fullymeet the conditions can be done randomly, or using any appropriatetechnique, such as by looking at the surprisal and/or conviction ofthose cases and choosing the K with the highest (or lowest) surprisaland/or conviction, or all of the K cases may be used. K may be 1, 2, 3,5, 10, 100, a percentage of the model, specified dynamically or locallywithin the model, or any appropriate number. For distance measurementsdiscussed herein (e.g., for use with K nearest neighbors), anyappropriate measure, metric, or premetric may be used, includingEuclidean distance, Minkowski distance, Damerau—Levenshtein distance,Kullback-Leibler divergence, l-Kronecker delta, cosine similarity,Jaccard index, Tanimoto similarity, and/or any other distance measure,metric, pseudometric, premetric, index, etc.

The conditions may be any appropriate single, multiple, and/orcombination of conditions. For example, individual values may be givenfor features (e.g., A=5 and B=3); ranges may be given (e.g., A>=5 andB<4); multiple values may be given (e.g., E=“cat”, “dog”, or “horse”);one or more combination can be given (e.g., [(A>1 and B<99) or (A=7 andE=“horse”)]).

As discussed elsewhere herein, some embodiments condition the values ofa feature on one or more previous-in-time values of a feature. In suchcases, the value of C may be conditioned on C[t−1] (representing thevalue of C in a previous time period), and/or C[t−2], etc. in additionto or instead of other conditions. For example, the conditions mayinclude A=5, B=3 and C[t−1]=99, C[t−2]=87. In some embodiments, thecondition may just be on previous values (e.g., just conditioned basedon C[t−1]=12). In some embodiments, the conditions may includeprevious-in-time values from multiple features. For example, theconditions may include A=5, A[t−1]=4, B=3, B[t−1]=2, C[t−1]=99.

As also discussed elsewhere herein, in some embodiments the conditionsused may include a preserved feature values, such as the UIDs for thesynthetic data. The UID may be a UID that exists in the set of trainingdata cases. In addition to conditioning on the determination of valuesfor undetermined features on the UID(s), the values may also beconditioned on one or more other values for features. For example, if atable of demographics for a financial institution has accountdemographics, it may have a UID. Synthetic data cases may be synthesizedbased on conditioning for each UID (or a subset, or randomly choosingUIDs, as discussed elsewhere herein). As discussed elsewhere herein, thetraining case with the same UID would then be one of the chosen focalcases (described herein). As another example, the synthetic table may begenerated based on the condition of the UID, and the value of a feature,such as an age range. The focal cases would then be chosen based on theUID as well as the age range. This may result in the training case withthe same UID being one of the focal cases. Further, there may be morethan one UID used as a condition for synthesis of a particular datacase, which may be useful when a table in the set of training data hasmore than one UID in each row.

The values for the conditioned features may be set or determined basedon the corresponding values for the features in the focal cases (e.g.,determined as the KNN of the conditions, as described above). Forexample, for each conditioned feature, the mean, mode, an interpolatedor extrapolated value, most-often occurring value of the correspondingfeature from among the focal cases may be chosen as the value for thefeature in the synthetic data case. In some embodiments, thedistribution of the values of the conditioned features in the focalcases may be calculated and a value may be chosen based on thatdistribution, which may include the maximum likelihood value, selectionvia random sampling, inverse distance weighting, kernel functions, orother function or learned metric. In some embodiments, the values forconditioned features are set to (or based on) the condition values (vs.the values for the conditioned feature in the focal cases as describedabove). For example, if the conditions are A=5 and B=3, then feature Amay be set to the value 5 and feature B may be set to the value 3regardless of the values of that feature in the focal cases.

When there are no conditions received 110 with the request for syntheticdata, a random case may be selected as a focal case or a set of randomcases may be selected as the set of focal cases. When there are noconditions, then, in some embodiments, the techniques begin by selectinga random case, selecting the first feature, or a random feature, or thenext feature prioritized by some metric, importance, conviction, orranking, and select the value from the selected case as the value of thefeature in the synthetic data value. Then, the techniques may proceed asdescribed. For example, in some embodiments, the value for a firstfeature (e.g., A=12 or UID=17) is chosen from the chosen case and thenthe KNN are determined 120. The KNN may be the K cases that are closestto having that value (e.g., A=12 or UID=17) are chosen as the focalcases. Additionally, other values computed from the data that arerelated to surprisal, confidence, or distance may be used in theselection of the focal cases (e.g., preferring the values to be chosenfrom areas where there is insufficient data, or when combined with othersurprisal metrics, to prefer values where there is not a lack of databut where the model residuals or uncertainty are high).

After the focal cases for the synthetic data have been determined 120(whether or not based on received 110 conditions), then a firstundetermined feature is selected 130. When there are no conditions,selecting 130 the first undetermined feature comprises selecting 130 oneof the features from the randomly selected case that was not previously(or already) determined. When there are conditions on the syntheticdata, then the conditioned features are first set based on theconditions and the focal cases that are KNN of the condition (asdescribed elsewhere herein). After the first feature(s) have beendetermined (whether or not there are conditions), then the next(undetermined) feature may be selected. Selecting 130 which undeterminedfeature to determine next can be done in any appropriate manner, such asselecting randomly among the remaining undetermined features, choosingthe feature with the highest or lowest conviction, etc.

The distribution of values for the undetermined feature is thendetermined 140. For example, the distribution may be assumed to be lognormal, Laplace, Gaussian, normal, or any other appropriatedistribution, and be centered, e.g., on the computed undeterminedfeature value or on the median or mode or weighted sample or selection(e.g., weighted by probability, inverse distance, frequency, or othermeasure of likelihood) of the values for the undetermined feature in theset of focal cases (or in the training data). The distribution for thefeature can also be determined by parameterizing it via surprisal usingthe distribution's entropy. For example, if a distribution has an error,σ, with the error modeled as a Gaussian distribution, and we know thatthe entropy of a sample from Gaussian distribution is ½ log(2 πe σ²), wecan adjust the error parameter to match a specified level of surprisalfor that feature when taking a sample of the feature as the synthesizedvalue. Alternatively, surprisal and/or conviction may also be determinedby measuring other types of information, such as Kullback-LeiblerDivergence (“KL divergence” or “Div_(KL)(x)”) or cross entropy, and adesired surprisal can be attained by adjusting the correspondingparameters for the distribution. Methods describing distance from apoint as a probability can be used to map the surprisal to distance, andmay include any relevant distribution. When synthesizing data formultiple features, each feature can be set to the same surprisal, oralternatively each feature can “use up” the surprisal budget for thesynthetic data parameterizing each feature's distribution with its ownamount of surprisal, treating total surprisal of the synthesized data asa budget or goal for all of the features together. Some features may beaccorded more surprisal than others, and therefore may “use up” more ofthe surprisal budget. In cases where higher surprisal is desired,distributions will typically be wider. In situations where lowersurprisal is desired, distributions will typically be narrower. Therelative surprisal accorded each feature may be set or determined in anyappropriate manner, including assigning the relative amount of surprisalrandomly, having the relative amounts set by a human operator, and/orsetting them based on a particular measure or metric, such as having thefeatures with the lowest (or highest) surprisal in the training databeing accorded more of the surprisal budget. Extensive additionaldiscussion of these techniques are given elsewhere herein.

The value of for the undetermined feature for the synthetic data casemay then be determined 150 based on the determined 140 distribution.Determining the value based on the determined 140 distribution comprisesselecting a value (or sampling) randomly based on a random number andthe determined 140 distribution. In some embodiments, this is performedvia inverse transform sampling. As one example, a random valuerepresenting the 3^(rd) percentile of the distribution of the randomvariable would translate to a value in the 3^(rd) percentile of thedistribution, and a uniformly generated random number may be transformedinto the distribution by the inverse cumulative density function. Insome embodiments, the distribution does not have a closed form solutionto translate a uniformly chosen random number to a random number fromthe parameterized distribution, and techniques to generate the requiredrandom number include rejection sampling, the Box-Muller transform, andthe Ziggurat algorithm. As denoted by the dotted line from determining150 and selecting 130 and/or determining 120, the process 100 maycontinue to determine values for features until there are no moreundetermined features. In order to determine 150 values for eachsubsequent undetermined feature in the synthetic data case, thealready-determined (or previously-determined) feature values are used todetermine 120 the K nearest neighbors (a new set of focal cases) to thatset of already-determined values (e.g., all of the feature values set tothat point). For example, if values A=3, B=5, and C=9.7 (or UID=17, A=3,B=5, and C=9.7) have already been set for the synthetic data case,either via conditioning or using process 100 (and value D is next to bedetermined), then the K nearest neighbors to the values for A, B, and C(or UID, A, B, and C) will be the new set of focal cases (as depicted bythe dotted line between determining 150 and determining 120 and/orselecting 130). Then the distribution (e.g., DistD) for that subsequentundetermined feature (e.g., feature D) is determined 140 for the new setof focal cases. A value for the subsequent undetermined feature (e.g.,D) is the determined based on a random sampling of the distribution(e.g., DistD) determined for that feature. When all of the featurevalues have been determined 150, then the synthetic data case iscomplete.

In some embodiments, determining 150 a value for a nominal feature mayinclude skipping the distribution determining 140 step, and insteaddetermining the value for the feature differently based on the desiredsurprisal or conviction. For example, if the desired conviction isinfinity or an arbitrarily large number (low surprisal), then the valuefor the nominal feature may be chosen so that the data case as a wholerepresents a data case in the original training data cases, thusrepresenting unsurprising results. If conviction is closer to one (e.g.,within a threshold value of one), then the distribution used todetermine the nominal value may be a blend of the global residual (e.g.,the probability of each nominal value in the set of original trainingdata cases) and the local residual (e.g., the probability of eachnominal value in the set of focal cases). Blending the local residualand global residual may take any appropriate form, such as weightingeach of the local and global residual, and combined the two weightedresults. The weights may be any appropriate weight, such as equalweights, or a weighting determined based on conviction. Further, theblending of local and global residual may be more continuous than justtwo samples, involving multiple samples of the distribution based on theconviction. If desired conviction is or approaches zero (highsurprisal), then the value for the nominal may be chosen randomly amongthe possible nominal values (e.g., using a 1/N probability for each of Npossible nominal values). When conviction is outside the thresholds touse the “infinity” conviction, the “one” conviction, and the “zero”conviction, then, in various embodiments, different or similarcalculation methods may be used. For example, in some embodiments, ifdesired conviction is less than one half, then the calculationtechniques associated with a conviction of zero may be used. In someembodiments, a nominal value can be chosen based on a weighting of thetwo techniques, optionally with the distance to the key conviction valuebeing the weighting. For example, with a desired conviction of 0.5, theweighting between use of 1/N probability for each of N possible nominalvalues may be weighted 50% and the blending of global and localresiduals may be weighted 50% and the value for the feature may bedetermined based on the weighted results.

In some embodiments, optionally, the synthetic data case can be testedfor fitness 160. Testing the synthetic data case for fitness 160 caninclude any appropriate technique, including confirming that thesynthetic data case meets any received 110 conditions, or whether itmeets other criteria, such as a fitness score or function. The fitnessscore or function may be any appropriate function. In some embodiments,the fitness function depends on the domain of the synthetic data caseand can be a measure of performance of the synthetic data case ascompared to other data cases. For example, the fitness function may be ameasure of speed, processing efficiency, or some other measure ofperformance. Further, the fitness function might be modified at random,to introduce additional variation. Further, as discussed herein,determining the fitness of the synthetic data case may includedetermining the k-anonymity, validity, and/or similarity of thesynthetic data case.

In some embodiments, after the completion of determination and testingof the synthetic data case, optionally, more synthetic data may begenerated, as indicated by the dashed line from 160 and 170 to 120 (inthe case of FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B) and/or 121 (in the case of FIG. 1C).The decision to generate more synthetic data may be based on thereceived 110 request for synthetic data. For example, the received 110request may indicate that a certain number (or at least a certainnumber) of synthetic data cases are to be generated, that cases aregenerated based on a threshold for surprisal or conviction for new cases(e.g., generate cases as long as the surprisal of each new case is atleast beyond a certain threshold), and/or the like. The decision togenerate more synthetic data may also be made based on one or morecriteria, where the criteria are different from the conditions on thedata. For example, the one or more criteria may include generating anamount of data based on the amount of data in the set of training data.As a more specific example, the one or more criteria could includegenerating data until the number of synthetic data cases (N′) meets athreshold based on a function of the number of data cases in the set oftraining data (N). This function may be N′=N, N′=(N−3)*1.04, N′=N*.94,or any other function. The criteria may also include generating morecases until particular measures related to the set of training data areapproximated by the synthetic data (e.g., a density of cases,distribution of cases, minimal number of cases of particular types,etc.). When there are more synthetic data cases to generate, the processwill proceed as discussed herein. In some embodiments, not depicted inFIG. 1A, FIG. 1B, or FIG. 1C, the process may additionally or insteadreturn to receive 110 more requests for synthetic data before proceedingto determine and test more synthetic data case(s).

Upon completion of determination and testing of the synthetic data case,optionally, it can be provided 170 as synthetic data. For example, thesynthetic data case may be provided 170 in response to the received 110request for data. In some embodiments, multiple synthetic data cases maybe created in response to receiving 110 the original request, and may beprovided 170 in response to that request. Providing the synthetic datacase(s) in response to the request can take any appropriate form,including having them sent via HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, FTPS, via an API, aremote procedure call, a function or procedure call, etc., and/or inresponse to one of the foregoing.

In some embodiments, optionally, after one or more synthetic data caseshave been created, control of a controllable system can be caused 199based at least in part on the synthetic data case(s) created usingprocess 100. For example, not depicted in FIG. 1A, a computer-basedreasoning model may be trained based on the synthetic data case(s)(and/or other sets of synthetic data cases, the training cases, and or acombination of such cases, or a combination of (sub)sets of such cases,etc.), and that model may be used to control a controllable system.Numerous examples of causing 199 control of a controllable system arediscussed herein and include, manufacturing control, vehicle control,image labelling control, smart device control, federated system control,etc.

Additional Example Processes for Synthetic Data Generation: ValueChecking

FIG. 1B is a flow diagram depicting example processes for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems. Similar numbers and textare used to describe similar actions in FIG. 1A, FIG. 1B, and FIG. 1C.The process 100 described in FIG. 1B may include different and/oradditional steps. For example, turning to FIG. 1B, as indicated by thedotted line, after the value for a feature is determined 150, thetechniques optionally include checking whether the determined 150 valueis valid 152. In some embodiments, the determined 150 value is checkedfor validity 152 using feature information, such as feature boundsand/or k-anonymity. For example, if feature bounds are known for aspecific feature, and the value determined 150 for that feature isoutside the feature bounds, then corrective action can be taken. Notpictured in FIG. 1 , feature bounds may be determined based on themodel, the data (e.g., observed and/or determined bounds of thefeature), provided by an operator (e.g., set bounds of the feature),and/or the like. In some embodiments, other feature information may alsobe used to check whether the value is valid 152. For example, if thefeature is related to one or more other features via correlation,inversely, or via other known relationship, then the value for thefeature can be checked for validity based on the values of the one ormore other related features. As a more specific example, if a featureindicates that a distributable agricultural quantity may be fertilizeror seeds, then the distribution rate bounds may differ considerablybased on the type of distributable commodity. Nitrogen may have adistribution rate between one and six pounds per one thousand squarefeet. Ryegrass seeds, on the other hand, may have a distribution ratebetween five and ten pounds per one thousand square feet. Further, eachof these distribution rates may be influenced by geographic region(e.g., as another feature). As such, checking the validity 152 of adistribution rate value may depend on both the type of agricultural itembeing distributed (a first additional feature) as well as geographicregion (a second additional feature).

If the determined 150 value is determined to be invalid 152, thencorrective action can be performed. Corrective action can include one ormore of re-determining a value for the feature (e.g., as described withrespect to determining 150 and represented by the dotted lines fromdetermining 150 to determining 120 and selecting 130), and optionallyagain checking the validity 152 of the newly determined 150 value. Thisprocess may continue until a valid value is determined, and/or up to acertain number of attempts before performing a different type ofcorrective action. In some embodiments, either after firstre-determining 150 a new value for the feature, or instead ofre-determining 150 a new value for the feature, a new value for thefeature can be determined using the feature information, such as featurerange. For example, the new value may be determined using a distributionacross the feature range (e.g., using a uniform distribution, a normaldistribution, etc.). In some embodiments, the new value for the featuremay instead be determined by capping it at the feature boundaries.

Additional Example Processes for Synthetic Data Generation: Identityand/or Similarity Checking

As another example of the additions and or changes to the techniques orprocess 100 depicted in FIG. 1B and FIG. 1C (vs. FIG. 1A), thetechniques may include, in addition to or instead of optionallydetermining fitness 160 of a synthetic data case, determining similarity160 of the synthetic data case with all or a portion of the trainingdata. Further, in some embodiments, even if not depicted in the figures,determining the validity 152, fitness 160, and/or similarity 160 ofgenerated data may be performed as part of the same step. As indicatedin FIG. 1A. For example, in FIG. 1A, validity, fitness, and/orsimilarity are all performed as part of determining fitness 160 of thegenerated data. In some embodiments, determining fitness, validity, andsimilarity may be included in a single term of validity, fitness, orsimilarity.

As noted above, in some embodiments, it may be important for syntheticdata to differ from the existing training data. As such, the generateddata may be checked for similarity with the training data. Thissimilarity test may be based on a distance measure of all and/or asubset of the features. For example, if a subset of features isconsidered particularly sensitive or important, the distance measure maybe used based on that subset of features. For example, instead of, or inaddition to, checking the distance of all features between the generateddata and the training data, the distance of a subset of the features maybe checked. Furthering the example, if three features have beendetermined or are known to be particularly determinative, then thedistance or similarity of those features for the generated data may bedetermined (as compared to the training data).

Similarity may be determined using Euclidean distance, Minkowskidistance, Damerau—Levenshtein distance, Kullback-Leibler divergence,cosine similarity, Jaccard index, Tanimoto similarity, and/or any otherdistance measure, metric, pseudometric, premetric, index, and/or thelike. In the event that synthetic data is identical or too similar toexisting training data (e.g., as measured by one of the measuresdiscussed above), the synthetic data case may be modified (e.g.,resampled) and retested, discarded, and/or replaced.

One or more newly generated synthetic data cases may be tested againstat least a portion of the training data. For example, in someembodiments, it may be important that newly generated cases differ fromall data in the training data. As such, newly generated data cases maybe assessed for similarity with all data cases in the training data. Ifover-similarity is found, then the synthetic data case may be modified(and retested), discarded, or replaced (and the replacement syntheticdata case tested for similarity). In some embodiments, it may only beimportant that the synthetic data case differ from a portion of theexisting training data. As such, the newly generated data case may betested for similarity to only that portion of the cases. As a morespecific example, if portions of the training data have personalinformation and other portions do not (e.g., the latter may have beensynthetically generated, and/or may be part of the public domain), thenthe test for similarity may only be with respect to the portion ofconcern—the former portion containing personal information. In someembodiments, determining similarity (or fitness) 160 of the generated orsynthetic data case may include determining the k-anonymity of the datacase (as discussed elsewhere herein).

As noted above, determining the similarity of the synthetic data casesto the existing training data may be important in embodiments where thesynthetic data needs to exclude identical and/or merely similarsynthetic data as compared to the existing training data. For example,if there is personally identifiable information and/or data usable tore-identify an individual in the existing training data, then it may beuseful if the synthetic data differs enough from the existing trainingdata in order to ensure that the synthetic data cannot be re-identifiedto persons in the existing training data. As a more specific example, ifthe synthetic data case were generated as identical to a training casein the existing training data for person X, then that synthetic datacase would be re-identifiable to person X. In contexts where it isdesirable that the synthetic data does not represent any person from theexisting training data, then it may be beneficial to determine whetherthere is any synthetic data that can be re-identified and modify ordiscard that synthetic data. Further, whether or not the data includespersonally identifiable information, ensuring that the synthetic datacases differ from the existing training data may still be desirable. Forexample, it may be desirable that the synthetic data not represent anyparticular existing training data in order to ensure that a model can bemade without including that training data. For example, a data owner maywant to share data (e.g., data related to machine vibration analysis)with a collaborator company, but may not want to share data specific totheir operation. As such, they may desire that the synthetic data not beoverly similar to their existing training data, but still be useful forthe collaborator company. The same can be true for a portion of thedata. For example, the data owner may want to ensure that data relatedto a particular driver (for self-driving vehicles) not be included inthe synthetic data. As such, that driver's data may be checked againstthe synthetic data for over similarity, and any overly-similar data maybe modified or discarded.

Additional Example Processes for Synthetic Data Generation

FIG. 1C is a flow diagram depicting example processes for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems. Similar numbers and textare used to describe similar actions in FIG. 1A, FIG. 1B, and FIG. 1C.The process 100 described in FIG. 1C may include different and/oradditional steps. For example, turning to FIG. 1C, the process depictedin FIG. 1C includes determining 121 one or more initial case(s). In someembodiments, there may be one initial case, and this initial case may beused as the basis on which the synthetic data is generated. The initialcase may be chosen randomly from among the cases in the training data;the values of the features for the initial case may be chosen at random(e.g., set as random values that satisfy the type (e.g., integer,positive number, nominal, etc.) of the feature, such as choosing aninteger if the feature requires an integer); may be chosen at randombased on the distribution of the features in the training data (asdiscussed elsewhere herein); may be chosen to match one or more (or all)features of a case in the training data; a combination of these, etc. Insome embodiments, two or more seed cases may be chosen (e.g., based onone or more conditions, at random, etc.), and the initial case can bedetermined based on the two or more seed cases (e.g., averaging thevalues from among the cases for each feature, using a voting mechanismfor feature values, choosing randomly among the feature values of theseed cases, and/or the like).

After the initial case is determined 121, a feature in the case isselected 130 to be replaced, which may also be termed “dropping” thefeature from the case. Selecting a feature is described elsewhereherein, and can include selecting a feature at random, selecting afeature with the lowest or highest conviction (of any type), and or anyother technique, including those discussed herein. Once a feature isselected 130, then a value for the feature may be determined 150.Determining 150 the value for the feature may be accomplished based onthe determined 140 distribution for the feature in the training data (asdescribed elsewhere herein) as a whole (sometimes referred to as theglobal model). In some embodiments, the value for the features may bedetermined 150 by determining 140 the distribution for the feature forthe local model (e.g., the k nearest neighbors). For example, in someembodiments, the closest k nearest neighbors of the case with thefeature dropped out may be determined and the value for the feature maybe determined based on the corresponding values for the feature in the knearest neighbors. The local model distribution may be determined 140and used to determine 150 the value for the feature. In someembodiments, not depicted in FIG. 1C, the value of the feature for thesynthetic data case can be determined from the corresponding values fromthe k nearest neighbors in any appropriate manner (e.g., not based onthe local model distribution), including averaging the values from amongthe cases for each feature, using a voting mechanism among the valuesfrom among the cases for each feature, choosing randomly among thevalues, and/or the like.

In some embodiments, the value for more than one feature may be droppedout and determined 140 and/or 150 at the same time. For example, two,three, seven, etc. features may be dropped out, and valued for thosetwo, three, seven, etc. features may be determined based on a globalmodel, a local model, etc. as described herein.

In some embodiments, features are dropped out, and new values aredetermined 140 and/or 150 iteratively until a termination condition ismet, as indicated by the dashed line between determining 150 andselecting 130 and determining 120. For example, in some embodiments,features will be dropped out and redetermined a fixed number of times(e.g., if there are F features, then this might happen a multiple of Ftimes (e.g., 6*F), or a fixed number of times, such as 10, 100, 2000,10{circumflex over ( )}7, etc., regardless of F). Further, features maybe dropped out and added back in in an order that ensures that eachfeature is replaced the same number of times, or a similar number oftimes (e.g., continue until all features have been replaced six times orreplace all features until each feature has been replaced at least sixtimes, but no more than seven times). In some embodiments, the number oftimes that a feature is replaced is not measured against the number oftimes that other features are dropped out and replaced, and thetechniques proceed irrespective of that measure.

In some embodiments, features are dropped out and added back in untilthere is below a threshold difference between the case before and afterthe feature was dropped out and the value for it redetermined. Forexample, the distance between the case before the feature(s) are droppedout and replaced and the case after feature value(s) are replaced can bedetermined. In some embodiments, if the distance is below a particularthreshold, then the process of iteratively dropping and replacing valueswill terminate. In some embodiments, the distance of the last Rreplacements may be measured. For example, if the distance between thepre-replacement case and the post-replacement case for the last Rreplacements is below a particular threshold, then the dropping andreplacing of values will terminate. The distance measure used may be anyappropriate distance measure, including those discussed herein andEuclidean distance, Minkowski distance, Damerau—Levenshtein distance,Kullback-Leibler divergence, cosine similarity, Jaccard index, Tanimotosimilarity, and/or any other distance measure, metric, pseudometric,premetric, index, or the like.

In some embodiments, the dropping and replacement of feature values maycontinue until the case is within a threshold distance of a case in thetraining data. For example, if a case is below a certain thresholddistance to a case in the training data, the dropping and replacement offeature values may be terminated. This may be beneficial when it is thecase that having a close distance between the synthetic data case and acase in the training data means that the synthetic data case issufficiently similar to cases in the training data. Further, in someembodiments, the dropping and replacement of feature values may onlyterminate if the distance is below a certain closeness threshold, butabove a second, identity threshold. This approach may be beneficial whenbeing closer than an identity threshold means that the synthetic datacase risks being overly similar, and possibly identifiable as, a case inthe training data.

In some embodiments, features are dropped out and added back in untilthere is below a threshold distance between the value of a featuredropped out and that added back in. For example, if the replacementvalue of a feature is within a certain predefined distance of the valueit is replacing, then the process of dropping and replacing values maystop. In some embodiments, the differences of the values for the last Rreplacements are checked to determine if, together, they are below aparticular threshold. If they are, then the process of dropping andreplacing values may be terminated and process 100 may continue.

In some embodiments, features are dropped out and added back in until acombination of conditions are met. For example, in some embodiments, acheck may be made to ensure that both (or either) of the conditions ofthe case changing by less than a first threshold distance is met andthere having been M iterations already performed.

Example Time Series Embodiments

Data cases are discussed extensively elsewhere herein. Further to thosediscussions, and as discussed herein, in some embodiments, data casesmay include features related to time series information for thefeatures. For example, a data case at time “t0” may include N features.In some embodiments, in addition to those N features from time t0, oneor more time series features may also be included, such as values fromt(−1), t(−2), etc. The time series features may be previous value(s) forfeature(s), difference(s) between the current value(s) and previousvalue(s), interpolated value(s) of previous value(s) for a fixed lag,differences between the current and previous value(s) divided by thetimestep or time delta to the previous value(s) (akin to a “velocity”),and/or higher derivatives such as dividing by time twice or taking thechange in velocity (acceleration). Further, in some embodiments, time(e.g., as a value that indicates when the data case was collected or asa value indicating the delta to the previous time step) may be includedinclude as a feature, and/or unique IDs to each time series of data isincluded. Some embodiments include feature weighting (discussedelsewhere herein), that allows inclusion of more than one approach totime series inclusion, and determination of what works best.

As noted above, the previous values may be included for less than the Ntotal features. For example, it may be known that some features do notor change little change over time (e.g., names of an individual may beassumed to not change over a small time period).

Time series features may be used in the same manner as other features.For example, the time series information for a data case may be used indistance measure(s), may be used to test k-anonymity, similarity,validity, closeness, etc. Further, in some embodiments, time seriesinformation may be generated as part of determining a synthetic datacase.

Reinforcement Learning and Other Additional Embodiments

In some embodiments, the techniques may be used for reinforcementlearning. For example, each time a synthetic data case is created, thenthe set of training cases can be updated and new synthetic data can begenerated based on the updated set of training cases. In someembodiments, the techniques herein are used for reinforcement learning.For reinforcement learning, the outcome or goal feature(s) (e.g., thescore of a game, or having a winning checkers match) are treated asconditioned inputs or features. For example, in the checkers example,the synthetic data case is generated with conditions of the current gameboard setup and where the move was part of a winning strategy. The“winning strategy” feature may have been set in the training data set.For example, once a game has been won, an outcome feature is set toeither “winning” or “losing” for all moves that had been made in thegame. As such, each move in a winning game has the outcome feature setto “winning” and each move in a losing game has outcome set to “losing.”As such, then the data is conditioned to pick only moves that are partof a winning game, that feature (outcome=“winning”) is used in the KNNcalculation discussed elsewhere herein.

The reinforcement learning scenarios can also include ranges (like ascore above, below, or within a certain threshold), and other criteria.For example, as discussed elsewhere herein, the techniques herein can beuseful in reinforcement learning situations where synthetic data isneeded on expensive, dangerous, and/or hard to reproduce scenarios. Forexample, if pipelines only fail (e.g., leak, explode, become clogged)0.001% of the time, but training data is needed to train acomputer-based reasoning system to detect when those scenarios are goingto happen, the techniques herein can be used to synthesize training datafor those rare cases. This allows additional training data for pipelinefailure to be gathered without incurring the difficulty, danger, andcost of actual pipeline failures. In such an example, the failure of thepipeline could be one of the conditions on the synthetic data. So, asdata is being generated, the focal cases determined 120 will be thoseassociated with pipeline failure, and the subsequently generatedfeatures will represent the distribution of values of those featureswithin the conditioned data.

In some embodiments, the techniques may be used to create synthetic datathat replicates users, devices, etc. For example, data that is based on,is similar to user data (or device data, etc.) can be created using thetechniques herein. Consider user data that cannot be used (because it isnot anonymous) and where one would prefer not to anonymize the data.That data can be used to create synthetic user data. If the dataincludes personally identifiable information as features (e.g., name,SSN, etc.), those features could be assigned random values, and the restof the features can be synthesized based on user data (and possiblyconditions) using the techniques discussed herein. Alternatively, insome embodiments, features containing personally identifiableinformation could also be generated based on existing user data, butwith very high surprisal, creating a much wider distribution than seenin the user data.

Overview of Surprisal, Entropy, and Divergence

Below is a brief summary of some concepts discussed herein. It will beappreciated that there are numerous ways to compute the concepts below,and that other, similar mathematical concepts can be used with thetechniques discussed herein.

Entropy (“H(x)”) is a measure of the average expected value ofinformation from an event and is often calculated as the sum overobservations of the probability of each observation multiple by thenegative log of the probability of the observation.

H(x)=−Σip(x _(i))*log p(x _(i))

Entropy is generally considered a measure of disorder. Therefore, highervalues of entropy represent less regularly ordered information, withrandom noise having high entropy, and lower values of entropy representmore ordered information, with a long sequence of zeros having lowentropy. If log₂ is used, then entropy may be seen as representing thetheoretical lower bound on the number of bits needed to represent theinformation in a set of observations. Entropy can also be seen as howmuch a new observation distorts a combined probability density or massfunction of the observed space. Consider, for example, a universe ofobservations where there is a certain probability that each of A, B, orC occurs, and a probability that something other than A, B, or C occurs.

Surprisal (“I(x)”) is a measure of how much information is provided by anew event x_(i).

I(x _(i))=−log p(x _(i))

Surprisal is generally a measure of surprise (or new information)generated by an event. The smaller the probability of X, the higher thesurprisal.

Kullback-Leibler Divergence (“KL divergence” or “Div_(KL)(x)”) is ameasure of difference in information between two sets of observation. Itis often represented as

Div_(KL)(x)=Σip(x _(i))*(log p(x _(i))−log q(x _(i))),

where p(x_(i)) is the probability of x_(i) after x_(i) has occurred, andq(x_(i)) is the probability of x_(i) before x_(i) has occurred.

Conviction Ratios Examples

In some embodiments, the relative surprisal or conviction within certainscopes, and in comparison to other scopes, can be determined. Forexample, a feature may have high conviction locally (within the near Nneighboring cases, as measured by a distance measure such as thosedescribed herein), and lower conviction elsewhere, or vice versa. In theformer, the feature would be considered locally stable and globallynoisy. In the latter, the opposite would hold and it would be locallynoisy and globally stable.

Many possible scopes for conviction determination could be used andcompared. A few are presented here, and others may also be used. In someembodiments, each scope compared may be a function of the distance froma case. For example, as discussed elsewhere herein a region may bedetermined. The region may include the N most similar cases to the casein question, the most similar P percent (as compared to the entiremodel), the cases within distance D, or the cases within a local densitydistribution, as discussed elsewhere herein. For example, the N mostsimilar cases to the suggested case (or to the input context) may bedetermined based on a distance measure, such as those described herein.The number N may be a constant, either globally or locally specified, ora relative number, such as a percentage of the total model size.Further, the cases in the region may also be determined based ondensity. For example, as discussed elsewhere herein, if the cases aroundthe case of interest meet a particular density threshold, those mostsimilar cases could be included in the regional set of cases (and casesnot meeting those density thresholds could be excluded). Further, insome embodiments, the similarity (or distance) may be measured based onthe context only, the action only, or the context and the action. Insome embodiments, only a subset of the context and/or action is used todetermine similarity (or distance).

The following are some example measures that may be determined:

-   -   W: Conviction of feature in the whole model;    -   X: Conviction of a feature outside the regional model;    -   Y: Conviction of a feature inside the regional model;    -   Z: Conviction of feature for local (k neighbors) model;    -   where “local” would typically, but not always, constitute a        smaller number of cases than the “regional” model.

As discussed elsewhere herein, conviction can be measured in numerousways, including excluding a feature from a particular model or portionof a model and measure the conviction as a function the surprisal ofputting the feature (or features, or data elements) back in. Convictionmeasures are discussed extensively herein.

As noted, above, other measures (other than W, X, Y, and Z, listedabove) can be used. After two (or more) of the conviction measures arecalculated, the ratio of those measures may be determined. For example,in some embodiments, a determined 120 conviction score (ratio) mayindicate whether a suggested case or feature of a case is “noisy.” Thenoisiness of a feature can be determined as a conviction score, in someembodiments, by determining local noisiness and/or relative noisiness.In some embodiments, local noisiness can be determined by looking forthe minimum of Y (or looking for the number of cases with Y<1). Relativenoisiness may be determined based on the ratio of Z to W. As anotherexample, in some embodiments, a high feature conviction ratio between Wand Y may indicate that the feature may be “noisy.” The noisiness of thefeature may be indicated based on the ratio of W to Y and/or Y to W.

In some embodiments, measure other that W, X, Y, and Z listed above mayinclude measures based on feature importance to a given target, featureimportance to the whole model, predictability of a feature with orwithout confidence bounds, measures of whether features contribute to ordetract from accuracy, and/or the like. For example, in someembodiments, the techniques include determining prediction convictionfor features based on a conviction of the accuracy of the predictionusing residuals. Using such techniques may be beneficial when featuresthat negatively impact accuracy in a region may be considered “noisy”and therefore be useful as a measure to include in a determination ofwhether to automatically cause 199 performance of a suggested action.

In some embodiments, once the noisiness of a case/feature is determinedas a conviction score, a decision can later be made whether to cause 199performance of the suggested action. For example, if the features (oraction) of the suggested case are not noisy (locally and/or regionally,depending on the embodiment), then a system may be confident inperforming the suggested action in the suggested case. If, however, thefeatures (or action) of the suggested case are noisy, then thatnoisiness measure may be provided along with the suggested action. Ise,a human operator may then review the noisiness data and determinewhether to perform the suggested action, a different action, or noaction at all.

Prediction Conviction Examples

In some embodiments, the conviction score is a prediction conviction ofa suggested case. As such, determining the certainty score can bedetermined as the prediction conviction. In some embodiments, when theprediction conviction is determined to be above a certain threshold,then performance of the suggested action can be caused 199. If theprediction conviction is determined to be below a certain threshold,then the prediction conviction score can be provided along with thesuggested cases. A human operator may then review the predictionconviction (and any other explanation data) and determine whether toperform the suggested action, a different action, or no action at all.

Determination of prediction conviction is given below. First,familiarity conviction is discussed. Familiarity conviction is sometimescalled simply “conviction” herein. Prediction conviction is alsosometimes referred to as simply “conviction” herein. In each instancewhere conviction is used as the term herein, any of the convictionmeasures may be used. Further, when familiarity conviction or predictionconviction terms are used, those measure are appropriate, as are theother conviction measures discussed herein.

Feature Prediction Contribution Examples

In some embodiments, feature prediction contribution is determined as aconviction score. Various embodiments of determining feature predictioncontribution are given herein. In some embodiments, feature predictioncontribution can be used to flag what features are contributing most (orabove a threshold amount) to a suggestion. Such information can beuseful for either ensuring that certain features are not used forparticular decision making and/or ensuring that certain features areused in particular decision making. If the feature predictioncontribution of a prohibited feature is determined to be above a certainthreshold, then the suggested action along with explanation data for thefeature prediction contribution can be provided to a human operator, whomay then perform the suggested action, a different action, or no actionat all. If the feature prediction contribution for undesirable featuresare determined to be below a certain threshold, then performance of thesuggested action may be caused 199 automatically.

Consider unknown and undesirable bias in a computer-based reasoningmodel. An example of this would be a decision-making computer-basedreasoning model suggesting an action based on a characteristic that itshould not, such deciding whether to approve a loan based on the heightof an applicant. The designers, user, or other operators of a loanapproval system may have flagged height as a prohibited factor fordecision making. If it is determined that height was a factor (forexample, the feature prediction contribution is above a certainthreshold) in a loan decision, that information can be provided to ahuman operator, who may then decide to perform the suggested action(approve the loan notwithstanding that it was made at least in partbased on height), a different action, or no action at all. If thefeature prediction contribution of height is below the certainthreshold, then the loan may be approved without further review based onthe contribution of height to the decision.

As noted above, in some embodiments, there may also be features whosecontribution are desired (e.g., credit score in the case of a loanapproval). In such cases, if the feature prediction contribution for afeature whose contribution is desired is determined to be below acertain threshold, then the suggested action along with the featureprediction contribution may be provided to a human operator who may thendecide to perform the suggested action (approve the loan notwithstandingthat it was made at without contribution of the desired feature), adifferent action, or no action at all. If the feature predictioncontribution of the desired feature is below the above threshold, thenperformance of the action may be caused 199 (e.g., loan may be approved)without further review based on the contribution of the desired feature(e.g., credit score) to the decision.

In some embodiments, not depicted in the figures, the featurecontribution is used to reduce the size of a model in a computer-basedreasoning system. For example, if a feature does not contribute much toa model, then it may be removed from the model. As a more specificexample, the feature prediction contribution may be determined formultiple input contexts (e.g., tens of, hundreds of, thousands of, ormore) input contexts and the feature contribution may be determined foreach feature for each input context. Those features that never reach anexclusionary threshold amount of contribution to a decision (e.g., asdetermined by the feature prediction contribution) may be excluded fromthe computer-based reasoning model. In some embodiments, only thosefeatures that reach an inclusion threshold may be included in thecomputer-based reasoning model. In some embodiments, both anexclusionary lower threshold and inclusionary upper threshold may beused. In other embodiments, average contribution of a feature may beused to rank features and the top N features may be those included inthe models. Excluding features from the model may be beneficial inembodiments where the size of the model causes the need for extrastorage and/or computing power. In many computer-based reasoningsystems, smaller models (e.g., with fewer features being analyzed) maybe more efficient to store and when making decision. The reduced modelsmay be used, for example, with any of the techniques described herein.

Familiarity Conviction Examples

Conviction and contribution measures may be used with the techniquesherein. In some embodiments, conviction measures may be related invarious ways to surprisal, including conviction being related to theratio of observed surprisal to expected surprisal. Various of theconviction and contribution measures are discussed herein, includingfamiliarity conviction. Familiarity conviction may be useful to employconviction as measure of how much information the point distorts themodel. To do so, the techniques herein may define a feature informationmeasure, such as familiarity conviction, such that a point's weighteddistance contribution affects other points' distance contribution andcompared to the expected distance contribution of adding any new point.In some embodiments, it may be useful to employ conviction as measure ofhow much information the point distorts the model. To do so, one maydefine a feature information measure, such as familiarity conviction,such that a point's weighted distance contribution affects other points'distance contribution and compared to the expected distance contributionof adding any new point.

Definition 1. Given a point x∈X and the set K of its k nearestneighbors, a distance function d: R^(z)×Z→R, and a distance exponent α,the distance contribution of x may be the harmonic mean

$\begin{matrix}{{\phi(x)} = {\left( {\frac{1}{❘K❘}{\sum\limits_{k \in K}\frac{1}{{d\left( {x,k} \right)}^{\alpha}}}} \right)^{- 1}.}} & (3)\end{matrix}$

Definition 2. Given a set of points X⊂R^(z) for every x∈X and an integer1≤k<|X| one may define the distance contribution probabilitydistribution, C of X to be the set

$\begin{matrix}{C = \left\{ {\frac{\phi\left( x_{1} \right)}{\sum_{i = 1}^{n}{\phi\left( x_{i} \right)}},\frac{\phi\left( x_{2} \right)}{\sum_{i = 1}^{n}{\phi\left( x_{i} \right)}},\ldots,\frac{\phi\left( x_{n} \right)}{\sum_{i = 1}^{n}{\phi\left( x_{i} \right)}}} \right\}} & (4)\end{matrix}$

for a function φ: X→R that returns the distance contribution.

Note that if φ(0)=∞, special consideration may be given to multipleidentical points, such as splitting the distance contribution amongthose points.

Remark 1. C may be a valid probability distribution. In someembodiments, this fact is used to compute the amount of information inC.

Definition 3. The point probability of a point x_(i), i=1, 2, . . . , nmay be

$\begin{matrix}{{l(i)} = \frac{\phi\left( x_{i} \right)}{\sum\limits_{i}{\phi\left( x_{i} \right)}}} & (5)\end{matrix}$

where the index i is assigned the probability of the indexed point'sdistance contribution. One may denote this random variable L.

Remark 2. When points are selected uniformly at random, one may assume Lis uniform when the distance probabilities have no trend or correlation.

Definition 4. The conviction of a point x_(i)∈X may be

$\begin{matrix}{{\pi\left( x_{i} \right)} = \frac{\frac{1}{❘X❘}{\sum\limits_{i}{{\mathbb{K}\mathbb{L}}\left( L||{{L - \left\{ i \right\}}\bigcup{{\mathbb{E}}{l(i)}}} \right)}}}{{\mathbb{K}\mathbb{L}}\left( {L{{{L - \left\{ x_{i} \right\}}\bigcup{{\mathbb{E}}{l(i)}}}}} \right)}} & (6)\end{matrix}$

where KL is the Kullback-Leibler divergence. In some embodiments, whenone assumes L is uniform, one may have that the expected probability

${{{{\mathbb{E}}{l(i)}} =}\frac{1}{n}}.$

Prediction Conviction Examples

In some embodiments, the conviction score is prediction conviction, andprediction conviction may be a proxy for accuracy of a prediction.Techniques herein may determine prediction conviction such that apoint's weighted distance to other points is of primary importance andcan be expressed as the information required to describe the position ofthe point in question relative to existing points.

Definition 5. Let ξ be the number of features in a model and n thenumber of observations. One may define the residual function of thetraining data X:

r:X→R ^(ξ)

r(x)=J ₁(k,p),J ₂(k,p), . . . ,J _(ξ)(k,p)  (7)

Where J_(i) may be the residual of the model on feature i parameterizedby the hyperparameters k and p evaluated on points near x. In someembodiments, one may refer to the residual function evaluated on all ofthe model data as r_(M). in some embodiments, the feature residuals maybe calculated as mean absolute error or standard deviation.

In some embodiments, one can quantify the information needed to expressa distance contribution φ(x) by moving to a probability. In someembodiments, the exponential distribution may be selected to describethe distribution of residuals, as it may be the maximum entropydistribution constrained by the first moment. In some embodiments, adifferent distribution may be used for the residuals, such as theLaplace, lognormal distribution, Gaussian distribution, normaldistribution, etc.

The exponential distribution may be represented or expressed as:

$\begin{matrix}{\frac{1}{\lambda} = {{r(x)}}_{p}} & (8)\end{matrix}$

We can directly compare the distance contribution and p-normed magnitudeof the residual. This is because the distance contribution is a locallyweighted expected value of the distance from one point to its nearestneighbors, and the residual is an expected distance between a point andthe nearest neighbors that are part of the model. Given the entropymaximizing assumption of the exponential distribution of the distances,we can then determine the probability that a distance contribution isgreater than or equal to the magnitude of the residual ∥r(x)∥_(p) as:

$\begin{matrix}{{P\left( {{\varphi(x)} \geq {{r(x)}}_{p}} \right)} = {e^{{- \frac{1}{{{r(x)}}_{p}}} \cdot {\varphi(x)}}.}} & (9)\end{matrix}$

We then convert the probability to self-information as:

I(x)=−lnP(φ(x)≥∥r(x)∥_(p)),  (10)

which simplifies to:

$\begin{matrix}{{I(x)} = {\frac{\varphi(x)}{{{r(x)}}_{p}}.}} & (11)\end{matrix}$

As the distance contribution decreases, or as the residual vectormagnitude increases, the less information may be needed to representthis point. One can then compare this to the expected value a regularconviction form, yielding a prediction conviction of:

$\begin{matrix}{{\pi_{p} = \frac{EI}{I(x)}},} & (12)\end{matrix}$

where I is the self-information calculated for each point in the model.

Additional Prediction Conviction Examples

In some embodiments, φ(x) may be the distance contribution of point x,and r (x) may be the magnitude of the expected feature residuals atpoint x using the same norm and same topological parameters as thedistance contribution, putting both on the same scale.

The probability of both being less than the expected values may be:

P(ϕ(x)>

ϕ(x))·P(r(x)>

r(x)).

The self-information of this, which may be the negative log of theprobability

${\pi_{p} = \frac{{\mathbb{E}}\left( {\frac{\phi(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + \frac{r(x)}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}} \right)}{\frac{\phi(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + \frac{r(x)}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}}}{{\pi_{p} = \frac{\frac{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + \frac{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}}{\frac{\phi(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + \frac{r(x)}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}}},{\pi_{p} = \frac{{\mathbb{E}}I}{I}}}$

The prediction conviction/then may be calculated as:

$I = {\frac{\phi(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + {\frac{r(x)}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}.}}$

which simplifies to

$\pi_{p} = {\frac{2}{\frac{\phi(x)}{{\mathbb{E}\phi}(x)} + \frac{r(x)}{{\mathbb{E}}{r(x)}}}.}$

Feature Prediction Contribution Examples

In some embodiments, another feature information measure, FeaturePrediction Contribution, may be related Mean Decrease in Accuracy (MDA).In MDA scores are established for models with all the features M andmodels with each feature held out M_(−f) _(i) , i==1 . . . ξ. Thedifference |M−M_(−f) _(i) | is the importance of each feature, where theresult's sign is altered depending on whether the goal is to maximize orminimize score.

In some embodiments, prediction information π_(c) is correlated withaccuracy and thus may be used as a surrogate. The expectedself-information required to express a feature is given by:

$\begin{matrix}{{{{EI}(M)} = {\frac{1}{\xi}{\overset{\xi}{\sum\limits_{i}}{I\left( x_{i} \right)}}}},} & \end{matrix}$

and the expected self-information to express a feature without feature iis

${{EI}\left( M_{- i} \right)} = {\frac{1}{\xi}{\sum\limits_{j = 0}^{\xi}{{I_{- i}\left( x_{j} \right)}.}}}$

One can now make two definitions:

Definition 6. The prediction contribution π_(c) of feature i is

$\begin{matrix}{{\pi_{c}(i)} = {\frac{M - M_{- f_{i}}}{M}.}} & \end{matrix}$

Definition 7. The prediction conviction, π_(p) of feature i is

$\begin{matrix}{{\pi_{p}(i)} = {\frac{\frac{1}{\xi}{\sum\limits_{i = 0}^{\xi}M_{- f_{i}}}}{M_{- f_{i}}}.}} & \end{matrix}$

Synthetic Data Generation Examples

In some embodiments, prediction conviction may express how surprising anobservation is. As such, one may, effectively, reverse the math and useconviction to generate a new sample of data for a given amount ofsurprisal. In some embodiments, generally, the techniques may randomlyselect or predict a feature of a case from the training data and thenresample it.

Given that some embodiments include calculating conditioned localresiduals for a part of the model, as discussed elsewhere herein, thetechniques may use this value to parameterize the random numberdistribution to generate a new value for a given feature. In order tounderstand this resampling method, it may be useful to discuss theapproach used by the Mann-Whitney test, a powerful and widely usednonparametric test to determine whether two sets of samples were drawnfrom the same distribution. In the Mann-Whitney test, samples arerandomly checked against one another to see which is greater, and ifboth sets of samples were drawn from the same distribution then theexpectation is that both sets of samples should have an equal chance ofhaving a higher value when randomly chosen samples are compared againsteach other.

In some embodiments, the techniques herein include resampling a point byrandomly choosing whether the new sample is greater or less than theother point and then draw a sample from the distribution using thefeature's residual as the expected value. In some embodiments, using theexponential distribution yields the double-sided exponentialdistribution (also known as the Laplace distribution), though lognormaland other distributions may be used as well.

If a feature is not continuous but rather nominal, then the localresiduals can populate a confusion matrix, and an appropriate sample canbe drawn based on the probabilities for drawing a new sample given theprevious value.

As an example, the techniques may be used to generate a random value offeature i from the model with, for example, no other conditions on it.Because the observations within the model are representative of theobservations made so far, a random instance is chosen from theobservations using the uniform distribution over all observations. Thenthe value for feature i of this observation is resampled via the methodsdiscussed elsewhere herein.

As another example, the techniques may be used to generate feature j ofa data element or case, given that, in that data element or case,features i∈Ξ have corresponding values x_(i). The model labels feature jconditioned by all x_(i) to find some value t. This new value t becomesthe expected value for the resampling process described elsewhereherein, and the local residual (or confusion matrix) becomes theappropriate parameter or parameters for the expected deviation.

In some embodiments, the techniques include filling in the features foran instance by beginning with no feature values (or a subset of all thefeature values) specified as conditions for the data to generate. Theremaining features may be ordered randomly or may be ordered via afeature conviction value (or in any other manner described herein). Whena new value is generated for the current feature, then the processrestarts with the newly-set feature value as an additional condition onthat feature.

Parameterizing Synthetic Data Via Prediction Conviction Examples

As discussed elsewhere, various embodiments use the double-sidedexponential distribution as a maximum entropy distribution of distancein Lp space. One may then be able to derive a closed form solution forhow to scale the exponential distributions based on a predictionconviction value. For example, a value, v, for the prediction convictionmay be expressed as

$\begin{matrix}{v = {{\pi_{p}(x)} = \frac{EI}{I(x)}}} & (13)\end{matrix}$

which may be rearranged as

$\begin{matrix}{{I(x)} = {\frac{EI}{v}.}} & (14)\end{matrix}$

Substituting in the self-information described elsewhere herein:

$\begin{matrix}{\frac{\varphi(x)}{{{r(x)}}_{p}} = {\frac{EI}{v}.}} & (15)\end{matrix}$

In some embodiments, that the units on both sides of Equation 15 match.This may be the case in circumstances where he natural logarithm andexponential in the derivation of Equation 15 cancel out, but leave theresultant in nats. We can rearrange in terms of distance contributionas:

$\begin{matrix}{{\varphi(x)} = {\frac{{{r(x)}}_{p} \cdot {EI}}{v}.}} & (16)\end{matrix}$

If we let p=0, which may be desirable for conviction and other aspectsof the similarity measure, then we can rewrite the distance contributionin terms of its parameter, λ_(i), with expected mean of

$\frac{1}{\lambda_{i}}.$

This becomes

$\begin{matrix}{{\Pi_{i}{E\left( {1/\lambda_{i}} \right)}} = {\frac{\Pi_{i}r_{i}{EI}}{v}.}} & (17)\end{matrix}$

In some embodiments, due to the number of ways surprisal may be assignedor calculated across the features, various solutions may exist. However,unless otherwise specified or conditioned, embodiments may includedistributing surprisal uniformly across the features, holding expectedproportionality constant. In some embodiments, the distance contributionmay become the mean absolute error for the exponential distribution,such as:

$\begin{matrix}{{E\left( {1/\lambda_{i}} \right)} = {r_{i}{\frac{EI}{v}.}}} & (18)\end{matrix}$

and solving for the λ_(i) to parameterize the exponential distributionsmay result in:

$\begin{matrix}{\lambda_{i} = {\frac{v}{r_{i}{EI}}.}} & (19)\end{matrix}$

In some embodiments, Equation 19, when combined with the value of thefeature, may become the distribution by which to generate a new randomnumber under the maximum entropy assumption of exponentially distributeddistance from the value.

Reinforcement Learning Examples

In some embodiments, the techniques can generate data with a controlledamount of surprisal, which may be a novel way to characterize theclassic exploration versus exploitation trade off in searching for anoptimal solution to a goal. Traditionally, pairing a means to search,such as Monte Carlo tree search, with a universal function approximator,such as neural networks, may solve difficult reinforcement learningproblems without domain knowledge. Because the data synthesis techniquesdescribed herein utilize the universal function approximator model (kNN)itself, it enables the techniques to be use in a reinforcement learningarchitecture that is similar and tightly coupled, as described herein.

In some embodiments, setting the conviction of the data synthesis to “1”(or any other appropriate value) yields a balance between explorationand exploitation. Because, in some embodiments, the synthetic datageneration techniques described herein can also be conditioned, thetechniques may condition the search on both the current state of thesystem, as it is currently observed, and a set of goal values forfeatures. In some embodiments, as the system is being trained, it can becontinuously updated with the new training data. Once states areevaluated for their ultimate outcome, a new set of features or featurevalues can be added to all of the observations indicating the finalscores or measures of outcomes (as described elsewhere herein, e.g., inrelation to outcome features). Keeping track of which observationsbelong to which training sessions (e.g., games) may be beneficial as aconvenient way to track and update this data. In some embodiments, giventhat the final score or multiple goal metrics may already be in the kNNdatabase, the synthetic data generation may allow querying for new dataconditioned upon having a high score or winning conditions (or any otherappropriate condition), with a specified amount of conviction.

In some embodiments, the techniques herein provide a reinforcementlearning algorithm that can be queried for the relevant training datafor every decision, as described elsewhere herein. The commonality amongthe similar cases, boundary cases, archetypes, etc. can be combined tofind when certain decisions are likely to yield a positive outcome,negative outcome, or a larger amount of surprisal thus improving thequality of the model. In some embodiments, by seeking high surprisalmoves, the system will improve the breadth of its observations.

Targeted and Untargeted Techniques for Determining Conviction and OtherMeasures

In some embodiments, any of the feature information measures, convictionor contribution measures (e.g., surprisal, prediction conviction,familiarity conviction, and/or feature prediction contribution and/orfeature prediction conviction) may be determined using an “untargeted”and/or a “targeted” approach. In the untargeted approach, the measure(e.g., a conviction measure) is determined by holding out the item inquestion and then measuring information gain associated with putting theitem back into the model. Various examples of this are discussed herein.For example, to measure the untargeted conviction of a case (orfeature), the conviction is measured in part based on taking the case(or feature) out of the model, and then measuring the informationassociated with adding the case (or feature) back into the model.

In order to determine a targeted measure, such as surprisal, conviction,or contribution of a data element (e.g., a case or a feature), incontrast to untargeted measures, everything is dropped from the modelexcept the features or cases being analyzed (the “analyzed dataelement(s)”) and the target features or cases (“target dataelement(s)”). Then the measure is calculated by measure the conviction,information gain, contribution, etc. based on how well the analyzed dataelement(s) predict the target data element(s) in the absence of the restof the model.

In each instance that a measure, such as a surprisal, conviction,contribution, etc. measure, is discussed herein, the measure may bedetermined using either a targeted approach or an untargeted approach.For example, when the term “conviction” is used, it may refer totargeted or untargeted prediction conviction, targeted or untargetedfamiliarity conviction, and/or targeted or untargeted feature predictionconviction. Similarly, when surprisal, information, and/or contributionmeasures are discussed without reference to either targeted oruntargeted calculation techniques, then reference may be being made toeither a targeted or untargeted calculation for the measure.

Systems for Synthetic Data Generation in Computer-Based ReasoningSystems

FIG. 2 is a block diagram depicting example systems for synthetic datageneration in computer-based reasoning systems. Numerous devices andsystems are coupled to a network 290. Network 290 can include theinternet, a wide area network, a local area network, a Wi-Fi network,any other network or communication device described herein, and thelike. Further, numerous of the systems and devices connected to 290 mayhave encrypted communication there between, VPNs, and or any otherappropriate communication or security measure. System 200 includes atraining and analysis system 210 coupled to network 290. The trainingand analysis system 210 may be used for collecting data related tosystems 250-258 and creating computer-based reasoning models based onthe training of those systems. Further, training and analysis system 210may perform aspects of process 100 and/or 400 described herein. Controlsystem 220 is also coupled to network 290. A control system 220 maycontrol various of the systems 250-258. For example, a vehicle control221 may control any of the vehicles 250-253, or the like. In someembodiments, there may be one or more network attached storages 230,240. These storages 230, 240 may store training data, computer-basedreasoning models, updated computer-based reasoning models, and the like.In some embodiments, training and analysis system 210 and/or controlsystem 220 may store any needed data including computer-based reasoningmodels locally on the system.

FIG. 2 depicts numerous systems 250-258 that may be controlled by acontrol system 220 or 221. For example, automobile 250, helicopter 251,submarine 252, boat 253, factory equipment 254, construction equipment255, security equipment 256, oil pump 257, or warehouse equipment 258may be controlled by a control system 220 or 221.

Example Processes for Controlling Systems

FIG. 4 depicts an example process 400 for controlling a system. In someembodiments and at a high level, the process 400 proceeds by receivingor receiving 410 a computer-based reasoning model for controlling thesystem. The computer-based reasoning model may be one created usingprocess 100, as one example. In some embodiments, the process 400proceeds by receiving 420 a current context for the system, determining430 an action to take based on the current context and thecomputer-based reasoning model, and causing 440 performance of thedetermined action (e.g., labelling an image, causing a vehicle toperform the turn, lane change, waypoint navigation, etc.). If operationof the system continues 450, then the process returns to receive 420 thecurrent context, and otherwise discontinues 460 control of the system.In some embodiments, causing 199 performance of a selected action mayinclude causing 440 performance of a determined action (or vice-versa).

As discussed herein the various processes 100, 400, etc. may run inparallel, in conjunction, together, or one process may be a subprocessof another. Further, any of the processes may run on the systems orhardware discussed herein. The features and steps of processes 100, 400could be used in combination and/or in different orders.

Self-Driving Vehicles

Returning to the top of the process 400, it begins by receiving 410 acomputer-based reasoning model for controlling or causing control of thesystem. The computer-based reasoning model may be received in anyappropriate matter. It may be provided via a network 290, placed in ashared or accessible memory on either the training and analysis system210 or control system 220, or in accessible storage, such as storage 230or 240.

In some embodiments (not depicted in FIG. 4 ), an operational situationcould be indicated for the system. The operational situation is relatedto context, but may be considered a higher level, and may not change (orchange less frequently) during operation of the system. For example, inthe context of control of a vehicle, the operational situation may beindicated by a passenger or operator of the vehicle, by a configurationfile, a setting, and/or the like. For example, a passenger Alicia mayselect “drive like Alicia” in order to have the vehicle driver like her.As another example, a fleet of helicopters may have a configuration fileset to operate like Bob. In some embodiments, the operational situationmay be detected. For example, the vehicle may detect that it isoperating in a particular location (area, city, region, state, orcountry), time of day, weather condition, etc. and the vehicle may beindicated to drive in a manner appropriate for that operationalsituation.

The operational situation, whether detected, indicated by passenger,etc., may be changed during operation of the vehicle. For example, apassenger may first indicate that she would like the vehicle to drivecautiously (e.g., like Alicia), and then realize that she is runninglater and switch to a faster operation mode (e.g., like Carole). Theoperational situation may also change based on detection. For example,if a vehicle is operating under an operational situation for aparticular portion of road, and detects that it has left that portion ofroad, it may automatically switch to an operational situationappropriate for its location (e.g., for that city), may revert to adefault operation (e.g., a baseline program that operates the vehicle)or operational situation (e.g., the last used). In some embodiments, ifthe vehicle detects that it needs to change operational situations, itmay prompt a passenger or operator to choose a new operationalsituation.

In some embodiments, the computer-based reasoning model is receivedbefore process 400 begins (not depicted in FIG. 4 ), and the processbegins by receiving 420 the current context. For example, thecomputer-based reasoning model may already be loaded into a controller220 and the process 400 begins by receiving 420 the current context forthe system being controlled. In some embodiments, referring to FIG. 2 ,the current context for a system to be controlled (not depicted in FIG.2 ) may be sent to control system 220 and control system 220 may receive420 current context for the system.

Receiving 420 current context may include receiving the context dataneeded for a determination to be made using the computer-based reasoningmodel. For example, turning to the vehicular example, receiving 420 thecurrent context may, in various embodiments, include receivinginformation from sensors on or near the vehicle, determining informationbased on location or other sensor information, accessing data about thevehicle or location, etc. For example, the vehicle may have numeroussensors related to the vehicle and its operation, such as one or more ofeach of the following: speed sensors, tire pressure monitors, fuelgauges, compasses, global positioning systems (GPS), RADARs, LiDARs,cameras, barometers, thermal sensors, accelerometers, strain gauges,noise/sound measurement systems, etc. Current context may also includeinformation determined based on sensor data. For example, the time toimpact with the closest object may be determined based on distancecalculations from RADAR or LiDAR data, and/or may be determined based ondepth-from-stereo information from cameras on the vehicle. Context mayinclude characteristics of the sensors, such as the distance a RADAR orLiDAR is capable of detecting, resolution and focal length of thecameras, etc. Context may include information about the vehicle not froma sensor. For example, the weight of the vehicle, acceleration,deceleration, and turning or maneuverability information may be knownfor the vehicle and may be part of the context information.Additionally, context may include information about the location,including road condition, wind direction and strength, weather,visibility, traffic data, road layout, etc.

Referring back to the example of vehicle control rules for Bob flying ahelicopter, the context data for a later flight of the helicopter usingthe vehicle control rules based on Bob's operation of the helicopter mayinclude fuel remaining, distance that fuel can allow the helicopter totravel, location including elevation, wind speed and direction,visibility, location and type of sensors as well as the sensor data,time to impact with the N closest objects, maneuverability and speedcontrol information, etc. Returning to the stop sign example, whetherusing vehicle control rules based on Alicia or Carole, the context mayinclude LiDAR, RADAR, camera and other sensor data, locationinformation, weight of the vehicle, road condition and weatherinformation, braking information for the vehicle, etc.

The control system then determined 430 an action to take based on thecurrent context and the computer-based reasoning model. For example,turning to the vehicular example, an action to take is determined 430based on the current context and the vehicle control rules for thecurrent operational situation. In some embodiments that use machinelearning, the vehicle control rules may be in the form of a neuralnetwork (as described elsewhere herein), and the context may be fed intothe neural network to determine an action to take. In embodiments usingcase-based reasoning, the set of context-action pairs closest (or mostsimilar) to the current context may be determined. In some embodiments,only the closest context-action pair is determined, and the actionassociated with that context-action pair is the determined 430 action.In some embodiments, multiple context-action pairs are determined 430.For example, the N “closest” context-action pairs may be determined 430,and either as part of the determining 430, or later as part of thecausing 440 performance of the action, choices may be made on the actionto take based on the N closest context-action pairs, where “distance”for between the current context can be measured using any appropriatetechnique, including use of Euclidean distance, Minkowski distance,Damerau—Levenshtein distance, Kullback-Leibler divergence, and/or anyother distance measure, metric, pseudometric, premetric, index, or thelike.

In some embodiments, the actions to be taken may be blended based on theaction of each context-action pair, with invalid (e.g., impossible ordangerous) outcomes being discarded. A choice can also be made among theN context-action pairs chosen based on criteria such as choosing to usethe same or different operator context-action pair from the lastdetermined action. For example, in an embodiment where there arecontext-action pair sets from multiple operators in the vehicle controlrules, the choice of which context-action pair may be based on whether acontext-action pair from the same operator was just chosen (e.g., tomaintain consistency). The choice among the top N context-action pairsmay also be made by choosing at random, mixing portions of the actionstogether, choosing based on a voting mechanism, etc.

Some embodiments include detecting gaps in the training data and/orvehicle control rules and indicating those during operation of thevehicle (for example, via prompt and/or spoken or graphical userinterface) or offline (for example, in a report, on a graphical display,etc.) to indicate what additional training is needed (not depicted inFIG. 4 ). In some embodiments, when the computer-based reasoning systemdoes not find context “close enough” to the current context to make aconfident decision on an action to take, it may indicate this andsuggest that an operator might take manual control of the vehicle, andthat operation of the vehicle may provide additional context and actiondata for the computer-based reasoning system. Additionally, in someembodiments, an operator may indicate to a vehicle that she would liketo take manual control to either override the computer-based reasoningsystem or replace the training data. These two scenarios may differ bywhether the data (for example, context-action pairs) for the operationalscenario are ignored for this time period, or whether they are replaced.

In some embodiments, the operational situation may be chosen based on aconfidence measure indicating confidence in candidate actions to takefrom two (or more) different sets of control rules (not depicted in FIG.4 ). Consider a first operational situation associated with a first setof vehicle control rules (e.g., with significant training from Aliciadriving on highways) and a second operational situation associated witha second set of vehicle control rules (e.g., with significant trainingfrom Carole driving on rural roads). Candidate actions and associatedconfidences may be determined for each of the sets of vehicle controlrules based on the context. The determined 430 action to take may thenbe selected as the action associated with the higher confidence level.For example, when the vehicle is driving on the highway, the actionsfrom the vehicle control rules associated with Alicia may have a higherconfidence, and therefore be chosen. When the vehicle is on rural roads,the actions from the vehicle control rules associated with Carole mayhave higher confidence and therefore be chosen. Relatedly, in someembodiments, a set of vehicle control rules may be hierarchical, andactions to take may be propagated from lower levels in the hierarchy tohigh levels, and the choice among actions to take propagated from thelower levels may be made on confidence associated with each of thosechosen actions. The confidence can be based on any appropriateconfidence calculation including, in some embodiments, determining howmuch “extra information” in the vehicle control rules is associated withthat action in that context.

In some embodiments, there may be a background or baseline operationalprogram that is used when the computer-based reasoning system does nothave sufficient data to make a decision on what action to take (notdepicted in FIG. 4 ). For example, if in a set of vehicle control rules,there is no matching context or there is not a matching context that isclose enough to the current context, then the background program may beused. If none of the training data from Alicia included what to do whencrossing railroad tracks, and railroad tracks are encountered in lateroperation of the vehicle, then the system may fall back on the baselineoperational program to handle the traversal of the railroad tracks. Insome embodiments, the baseline model is a computer-based reasoningsystem, in which case context-action pairs from the baseline model maybe removed when new training data is added. In some embodiments, thebaseline model is an executive driving engine which takes over controlof the vehicle operation when there are no matching contexts in thevehicle control rules (e.g., in the case of a context-based reasoningsystem, there might be no context-action pairs that are sufficiently“close”).

In some embodiments, determining 430 an action to take based on thecontext can include determining whether vehicle maintenance is needed.As described elsewhere herein, the context may include wear and/ortiming related to components of the vehicle, and a message related tomaintenance may be determined based on the wear or timing. The messagemay indicate that maintenance may be needed or recommended (e.g.,because preventative maintenance is often performed in the timing orwear context, because issues have been reported or detected withcomponents in the timing or wear context, etc.). The message may be sentto or displayed for a vehicle operator (such as a fleet managementservice) and/or a passenger. For example, in the context of anautomobile with sixty thousand miles, the message sent to a fleetmaintenance system may include an indication that a timing belt may needto be replaced in order to avoid a P percent chance that the belt willbreak in the next five thousand miles (where the predictive informationmay be based on previously-collected context and action data, asdescribed elsewhere herein). When the automobile reaches ninety thousandmiles and assuming the belt has not been changed, the message mayinclude that the chance that the belt will break has increased to, e.g.,P*4 in the next five thousand miles.

Performance of the determined 430 action is then caused 440. Turning tothe vehicular example, causing 440 performance of the action may includedirect control of the vehicle and/or sending a message to a system,device, or interface that can control the vehicle. The action sent tocontrol the vehicle may also be translated before it is used to controlthe vehicle. For example, the action determined 430 may be to navigateto a particular waypoint. In such an embodiment, causing 440 performanceof the action may include sending the waypoint to a navigation system,and the navigation system may then, in turn, control the vehicle on afiner-grained level. In other embodiments, the determined 430 action maybe to switch lanes, and that instruction may be sent to a control systemthat would enable the car to change the lane as directed. In yet otherembodiments, the action determined 430 may be lower-level (e.g.,accelerate or decelerate, turn 4° to the left, etc.), and causing 440performance of the action may include sending the action to be performedto a control of the vehicle, or controlling the vehicle directly. Insome embodiments, causing 440 performance of the action includes sendingone or more messages for interpretation and/or display. In someembodiments, the causing 440 the action includes indicating the actionto be taken at one or more levels of a control hierarchy for a vehicle.Examples of control hierarchies are given elsewhere herein.

Some embodiments include detecting anomalous actions taken or caused 440to be taken. These anomalous actions may be signaled by an operator orpassenger, or may be detected after operation of the vehicle (e.g., byreviewing log files, external reports, etc.). For example, a passengerof a vehicle may indicate that an undesirable maneuver was made by thevehicle (e.g., turning left from the right lane of a 2-lane road) or logfiles may be reviewed if the vehicle was in an accident. Once theanomaly is detected, the portion of the vehicle control rules (e.g.,context-action pair(s)) related to the anomalous action can bedetermined. If it is determined that the context-action pair(s) areresponsible for the anomalous action, then those context-action pairscan be removed or replaced using the techniques herein.

Referring to the example of the helicopter fleet and the vehicle controlrules associated with Bob, the vehicle control 220 may determine 430what action to take for the helicopter based on the received 420context. The vehicle control 220 may then cause the helicopter toperform the determined action, for example, by sending instructionsrelated to the action to the appropriate controls in the helicopter. Inthe driving example, the vehicle control 220 may determine 430 whataction to take based on the context of vehicle. The vehicle control maythen cause 440 performance of the determined 430 action by theautomobile by sending instructions to control elements on the vehicle.

If there are more 450 contexts for which to determine actions for theoperation of the system, then the process 400 returns to receive 410more current contexts. Otherwise, process 400 ceases 460 control of thesystem. Turning to the vehicular example, as long as there is acontinuation of operation of the vehicle using the vehicle controlrules, the process 400 returns to receive 420 the subsequent currentcontext for the vehicle. If the operational situation changes (e.g., theautomobile is no longer on the stretch of road associated with theoperational situation, a passenger indicates a new operationalsituation, etc.), then the process returns to determine the newoperational situation. If the vehicle is no longer operating undervehicle control rules (e.g., it arrived at its destination, a passengertook over manual control, etc.), then the process 400 will discontinue460 autonomous control of the vehicle.

Many of the examples discussed herein for vehicles discuss self-drivingautomobiles. As depicted in FIG. 2 , numerous types of vehicles can becontrolled. For example, a helicopter 251 or drone, a submarine 252, orboat or freight ship 253, or any other type of vehicle such as plane ordrone (not depicted in FIG. 2 ), construction equipment, (not depictedin FIG. 2 ), and/or the like. In each case, the computer-based reasoningmodel may differ, including using different features, using differenttechniques described herein, etc. Further, the context of each type ofvehicle may differ. Flying vehicles may need context data such asweight, lift, drag, fuel remaining, distance remaining given fuel,windspeed, visibility, etc. Floating vehicles, such as boats, freightvessels, submarines, and the like may have context data such asbuoyancy, drag, propulsion capabilities, speed of currents, a measure ofthe choppiness of the water, fuel remaining, distance capabilityremaining given fuel, and the like. Manufacturing and other equipmentmay have as context width of area traversing, turn radius of thevehicle, speed capabilities, towing/lifting capabilities, and the like.

Image Labelling

The techniques herein may also be used for image-labeling systems. Forexample, numerous experts may label images (e.g., identifying featuresof or elements within those images). For example, the human experts mayidentify cancerous masses on x-rays. Having these experts label allinput images is incredibly time consuming to do on an ongoing basis, inaddition to being expensive (paying the experts). The techniques hereinmay be used to train an image-labeling computer-based reasoning modelbased on previously-trained images. Once the image-labelingcomputer-based reasoning system has been built, then input images may beanalyzed using the image-based reasoning system. In order to build theimage-labeling computer-based reasoning system, images may be labeled byexperts and used as training data. Using the techniques herein, thesurprisal and/or conviction of the training data can be used to build animage-labeling computer-based reasoning system that balances the size ofthe computer-based reasoning model with the information that eachadditional image (or set of images) with associated labels provides.Once the image-labelling computer-based reasoning is trained, it can beused to label images in the future. For example, a new image may comein, the image-labelling computer-based reasoning may determine one ormore labels for the image, and then the one or more labels may then beapplied to the image. Thus, these images can be labeled automatically,saving the time and expense related to having experts label the images.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining thesurprisal and/or conviction of each image (or multiple images) and theassociated labels or of the aspects of the computer-based reasoningmodel. The surprisal and/or conviction for the one or more images may bedetermined and a determination may be made whether to select or includethe one or more images (or aspects) in the image-labeling computer-basedreasoning model based on the determined surprisal and/or conviction.While there are more sets of one or more images with labels to assess,the process may return to determine whether more image or label setsshould be included or whether aspects should be included and/or changedin the model. Once there are no more images or aspects to consider, theprocess can turn to controlling the image analysis system using theimage-labeling computer-based reasoning.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the image-labeling computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of an image-labeling system using process400. For example, if the data elements are related to images and labelsapplied to those images, then the image-labeling computer-basedreasoning model trained on that data will apply labels to incomingimages. Process 400 proceeds by receiving 410 an image-labelingcomputer-based reasoning model. The process proceeds by receiving 420 animage for labeling. The image-labeling computer-based reasoning model isthen used to determine 430 labels for the input image. The image is thenlabeled 440. If there are more 450 images to label, then the systemreturns to receive 410 those images and otherwise ceases 460. In suchembodiments, the image-labeling computer-based reasoning model may beused to select labels based on which training image is “closest” (ormost similar) to the incoming image. The label(s) associated with thatimage will then be selected to apply to the incoming image.

Manufacturing and Assembly

The processes 100, 400 may also be used for manufacturing and/orassembly. For example, conviction can be used to identify normalbehavior versus anomalous behavior of such equipment. Using thetechniques herein, a crane (e.g., crane 255 of FIG. 2 ), robot arm, orother actuator is attempting to “grab” something and its surprisal istoo high, it can stop, sound an alarm, shutdown certain areas of thefacility, and/or request for human assistance. Anomalous behavior thatis detected via conviction among sensors and actuators can be used todetect when there is some sort breakdown, unusual wear or mechanical orother malfunction, etc. It can also be used to find damaged equipmentfor repairs or buffing or other improvements for any robots or othermachines that are searching and correcting defects in products orthemselves (e.g., fixing a broken wire or smoothing out cuts made to theends of a manufactured artifact made via an extrusion process).Conviction can also be used for cranes and other grabbing devices tofind which cargo or items are closest matches to what is needed.Conviction can be used to drastically reduce the amount of time to traina robot to perform a new task for a new product or custom order, becausethe robot will indicate the aspects of the process it does notunderstand and direct training towards those areas and away from thingsit has already learned. Combining this with stopping ongoing actionswhen an anomalous situation is detected would also allow a robot tobegin performing work before it is fully done training, the same waythat a human apprentice may help out someone experienced while theapprentice is learning the job. Conviction can also inform what featuresor inputs to the robot are useful and which are not.

As an additional example in the manufacturing or assembly context,vibration data can be used to diagnose (or predict) issues withequipment. In some embodiments, the training data for the computer-basedreasoning system would be vibration data (e.g., the output of one ormore piezo vibration sensors attached to one or more pieces ofmanufacturing equipment) for a piece of equipment along with diagnosisof an issue or error that occurred with the equipment. The training datamay similarly include vibration data for the manufacturing equipmentthat is not associated with an issue or error with the equipment. Insubsequent operation of the same or similar equipment, the vibrationdata can be collected, and the computer-based reasoning model can beused to assess that vibration data to either diagnose or predictpotential issues or errors with the equipment. For example, thevibration data for current (or recent) operation of one or more piecesof equipment, the computer-based reasoning model may be used to predict,diagnose, or otherwise determine issues or errors with the equipment. Asa more specific example, a current context of vibration data for one ormore pieces of manufacturing equipment may result in a diagnosis orprediction of various conditions, including, but not limited to:looseness of a piece of equipment (e.g., a loose screw), an imbalance ona rotating element (e.g., grime collected on a rotating wheel),misalignment or shaft runout (e.g., machine shafts may be out ofalignment or not parallel), wear (e.g., ball or roller bearings, drivebelts or gears become worn, they might cause vibration). As a furtherexample, misalignment can be caused during assembly or develop overtime, due to thermal expansion, components shifting or improperreassembly after maintenance. When a roller or ball bearing becomespitted, for instance, the rollers or ball bearing will cause a vibrationeach time there is contact at the damaged area. A gear tooth that isheavily chipped or worn, or a drive belt that is breaking down, can alsoproduce vibration. Diagnosis or prediction of the issue or error can bemade based on the current or recent vibration data, and a computer-basedreasoning model training data from the previous vibration data andassociated issues or errors. Diagnosing or predicting the issues ofvibration can be especially important where the vibration can causeother issues. For example, wear on a bearing may cause a vibration thatthen loosens another piece of equipment, which then can cause otherissues and damage to equipment, failure of equipment, and even failureof the assembly or manufacturing process.

In some embodiments, techniques herein may determine (e.g., in responseto a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or more dataelements (e.g., of the manufacturing equipment) or aspects (e.g.,features of context-action pairs or aspects of the model) to potentiallyinclude in the manufacturing control computer-based reasoning model. Thesurprisal and/or conviction for the one or more manufacturing elementsmay be determined and a determination may be made whether to select orinclude the one or more manufacturing data elements or aspects in themanufacturing control computer-based reasoning model based on thedetermined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets of oneor more manufacturing data elements or aspects to assess (e.g., fromadditional equipment and/or from subsequent time periods), the processmay return to determine whether more manufacturing data elements oraspects sets should be included in the computer-based reasoning model.Once there are no more manufacturing data elements or aspects toconsider for inclusion, the process can turn to controlling or causingcontrol of the manufacturing system using the manufacturing controlcomputer-based reasoning system.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the manufacturing controlcomputer-based reasoning model. Based on a model using the syntheticdata, causing 199 control of a manufacturing system may be accomplishedby process 400. For example, if the data elements are related tomanufacturing data elements or aspects, then the manufacturing controlcomputer-based reasoning model trained on that data will cause controlmanufacturing or assemble. Process 400 proceeds by receiving 410 amanufacturing control computer-based reasoning model. The processproceeds by receiving 420 a context. The manufacturing controlcomputer-based reasoning model is then used to determine 430 an actionto take. The action is then performed by the control system (e.g.,caused by the manufacturing control computer-based reasoning system). Ifthere are more 450 contexts to consider, then the system returns toreceive 410 those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In suchembodiments, the manufacturing control computer-based reasoning modelmay be used to control a manufacturing system. The chosen actions arethen performed by a control system.

Smart Voice Control

The processes 100, 400 may be used for smart voice control. For example,combining multiple inputs and forms of analysis, the techniques hereincan recognize if there is something unusual about a voice controlrequest. For example, if a request is to purchase a high-priced item orunlock a door, but the calendar and synchronized devices indicate thatthe family is out of town, it could send a request to the person's phonebefore confirming the order or action; it could be that an intruder hasrecorded someone's voice in the family or has used artificialintelligence software to create a message and has broken in. It candetect other anomalies for security or for devices activating at unusualtimes, possibly indicating some mechanical failure, electronics failure,or someone in the house using things abnormally (e.g., a childfrequently leaving the refrigerator door open for long durations).Combined with other natural language processing techniques beyondsentiment analysis, such as vocal distress, a smart voice device canrecognize that something is different and ask, improving the person'sexperience and improving the seamlessness of the device into theperson's life, perhaps playing music, adjusting lighting, or HVAC, orother controls. The level of confidence provided by conviction can alsobe used to train a smart voice device more quickly as it can askquestions about aspects of its use that it has the least knowledgeabout. For example: “I noticed usually at night, but also some days, youturn the temperature down in what situations should I turn thetemperature down? What other inputs (features) should I consider?”

Using the techniques herein, a smart voice device may also be able tolearn things it otherwise may not be able to. For example, if the smartvoice device is looking for common patterns in any of the aforementionedactions or purchases and the conviction drops below a certain threshold,it can ask the person if it should take on a particular action oradditional autonomy without prompting, such as “It looks like you'renormally changing the thermostat to colder on days when you have yourexercise class, but not on days when it is cancelled; should I do thisfrom now on and prepare the temperature to your liking?”

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining (e.g.,in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or moredata elements (e.g., of the smart voice system) or aspects (e.g.,features of the data or parameters of the model) to potentially includein the smart voice system control computer-based reasoning model. Thesurprisal for the one or more smart voice system data elements oraspects may be determined and a determination may be made whether toinclude the one or more smart voice system data elements or aspects inthe smart voice system control computer-based reasoning model based onthe determined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets ofone or more smart voice system data elements or aspects to assess, theprocess may return to determine whether more smart voice system dataelements or aspects sets should be included. Once there are no moresmart voice system data elements or aspects to consider, the process canturn to controlling or causing control of the smart voice system usingthe smart voice system control computer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the smart voice computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of a smart voice system using process 400.For example, if the data elements are related to smart voice systemactions, then the smart voice system control computer-based reasoningmodel trained on that data will control smart voice systems. Process 400proceeds by receiving 410 a smart voice computer-based reasoning model.The process proceeds by receiving 420 a context. The smart voicecomputer-based reasoning model is then used to determine 430 an actionto take. The action is then performed by the control system (e.g.,caused by the smart voice computer-based reasoning system). If there aremore 450 contexts to consider, then the system returns to receive 410those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In such embodiments, the smartvoice computer-based reasoning model may be used to control a smartvoice system. The chosen actions are then performed by a control system.

Control of Federated Devices

The processes 100, 400 may also be used for federated device systems.For example, combining multiple inputs and forms of analysis, thetechniques herein can recognize if there is something that shouldtrigger action based on the state of the federated devices. For example,if the training data includes actions normally taken and/or statuses offederated devices, then an action to take could be an often-taken actionin the certain (or related contexts). For example, in the context of asmart home with interconnected heating, cooling, appliances, lights,locks, etc., the training data could be what a particular user does atcertain times of day and/or in particular sequences. For example, if, ina house, the lights in the kitchen are normally turned off after thestove has been off for over an hour and the dishwasher has been started,then when that context again occurs, but the kitchen light has not beenturned off, the computer-based reasoning system may cause an action tobe taken in the smart home federated systems, such as prompting (e.g.,audio) whether the user of the system would like the kitchen lights tobe turned off. As another example, training data may indicate that auser sets the house alarm and locks the door upon leaving the house(e.g., as detected via geofence). If the user leaves the geofencedlocation of the house and has not yet locked the door and/or set thealarm, the computer-based reasoning system may cause performance of anaction such as inquiring whether it should lock the door and/or set analarm. As yet another example, in the security context, the control maybe for turning on/off cameras, or enact other security measures, such assounding alarms, locking doors, or even releasing drones and the like.Training data may include previous logs and sensor data, door or windowalarm data, time of day, security footage, etc. and when securitymeasure were (or should have been) taken. For example, a context such asparticular window alarm data for a particular basement window coupledwith other data may be associated with an action of sounding an alarm,and when a context occurs related to that context, an alarm may besounded.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining thesurprisal and/or conviction of one or more data elements or aspects ofthe federated device control system for potential inclusion in thefederated device control computer-based reasoning model. The surprisalfor the one or more federated device control system data elements may bedetermined and a determination may be made whether to select or includethe one or more federated device control system data elements in thefederated device control computer-based reasoning model based on thedetermined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets of oneor more federated device control system data elements or aspects toassess, the process may return to determine whether more federateddevice control system data elements or aspect sets should be included.Once there are no more federated device control system data elements oraspects to consider, the process can turn to controlling or causingcontrol of the federated device control system using the federateddevice control computer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the federated device computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of a federated device system using process400. For example, if the data elements are related to federated devicesystem actions, then the federated device control computer-basedreasoning model trained on that data will control federated devicecontrol system. Process 400 proceeds by receiving 410 a federated devicecontrol computer-based reasoning model. The process proceeds byreceiving 420 a context. The federated device control computer-basedreasoning model is then used to determine 430 an action to take. Theaction is then performed by the control system (e.g., caused by thefederated device control computer-based reasoning system). If there aremore 450 contexts to consider, then the system returns to receive 410those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In such embodiments, thefederated device control computer-based reasoning model may be used tocontrol federated devices. The chosen actions are then performed by acontrol system.

Control and Automation of Experiments

The processes 100, 400 may also be used to control laboratoryexperiments. For example, many lab experiments today, especially in thebiological and life sciences, but also in agriculture, pharmaceuticals,materials science and other fields, yield combinatorial increases, interms of numbers, of possibilities and results. The fields of design ofexperiment, as well as many combinatorial search and explorationtechniques are currently combined with statistical analysis. However,conviction-based techniques such as those herein can be used to guide asearch for knowledge, especially if combined with utility or fitnessfunctions. Automated lab experiments (including pharmaceuticals,biological and life sciences, material science, etc.) may have actuatorsand may put different chemicals, samples, or parts in differentcombinations and put them under different circumstances. Usingconviction to guide the machines enables them to home in on learning howthe system under study responds to different scenarios, and, forexample, searching areas of greatest uncertainty (e.g., the areas withlow conviction as discussed herein). Conceptually speaking, when theconviction or surprisal is combined with a fitness, utility, or valuefunction, especially in a multiplicative fashion, then the combinationis a powerful information theoretic approach to the classic explorationvs exploitation trade-offs that are made in search processes fromartificial intelligence to science to engineering. Additionally, such asystem can automate experiments where it can predict the most effectiveapproach, homing in on the best possible, predictable outcomes for aspecific knowledge base. Further, like in the other embodimentsdiscussed herein, it could indicate (e.g., raise alarms) to humanoperators when the results are anomalous, or even tell which featuresbeing measured are most useful (so that they can be appropriatelymeasured) or when measurements are not sufficient to characterize theoutcomes. This is discussed extensively elsewhere herein. If the systemhas multiple kinds of sensors that have “costs” (e.g., monetary, time,computation, etc.) or cannot be all activated simultaneously, thefeature entropies or convictions could be used to activate or deactivatethe sensors to reduce costs or improve the distinguishability of theexperimental results.

In the context of agriculture, growers may experiment with varioustreatments (plant species or varietals, crop types, seed plantingdensities, seed spacings, fertilizer types and densities, etc.) in orderto improve yield and/or reduce cost. In comparing the effects ofdifferent practices (treatments), experimenters or growers need to knowif the effects observed in the crop or in the field are simply a productof the natural variation that occurs in every ecological system, orwhether those changes are truly a result of the new treatments. In orderto ameliorate the confusion caused by overlapping crop, treatment, andfield effects, different design types can be used (e.g., demonstrationstrip, replication control or measurement, randomized block, split plot,factorial design, etc.). Regardless, however, of the type of test designtype used, determination of what treatment(s) to use is crucial tosuccess. Using the techniques herein to guide treatment selection (andpossible design type) enables experimenters and growers to home in onhow the system under study responds to different treatments andtreatment types, and, for example, searching areas of greatestuncertainty in the “treatment space” (e.g., what are the types oftreatments about which little is known?). Conceptually, the combinationof conviction or surprisal with a value, utility, or fitness functionsuch as yield, cost, or a function of yield and cost, become a powerfulinformation theoretic approach to the classic exploration vsexploitation trade-offs that are made in search processes fromartificial intelligence to science to engineering. Growers can use thisinformation to choose treatments balancing exploitation (e.g., doingthings similar to what has produced high yields previously) andexploration (e.g., trying treatments unlike previous ones, withyet-unknown results). Additionally, the techniques can automateexperiments on treatments (either in selection of treatments, designs,or robotic or automated planting using the techniques described herein)where it can predict the most effective approach, and automaticallyperform the planting or other distribution (e.g., of fertilizer, seed,etc.) required of to perform the treatment. Further, like in the otherembodiments discussed herein, it could indicate (e.g., raise alarms) tohuman operators when the results are anomalous, or even tell whichfeatures being measured are most useful or when measurements are notuseful to characterize the outcomes (e.g., and may possibly be discardedor no longer measured). If the system has types of sensors (e.g., soilmoisture, nitrogen levels, sun exposure) that have “costs” (e.g.,monetary, time, computation, etc.) or cannot be all collected oractivated simultaneously, the feature entropies or convictions could beused to activate or deactivate the sensors to reduce costs whileprotecting the usefulness of the experimental results.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining (e.g.,in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or moredata elements or aspects of the experiment control system. The surprisalfor the one or more experiment control system data elements or aspectsmay be determined and a determination may be made whether to select orinclude the one or more experiment control system data elements oraspects in an experiment control computer-based reasoning model based onthe determined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets ofone or more experiment control system data elements or aspects toassess, the process may return to determine whether more experimentcontrol system data elements or aspects sets should be included. Oncethere are no more experiment control system data elements or aspects toconsider, the process can cause 199 control of the experiment controlsystem using the experiment control computer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the experiment control computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of an experiment control system usingprocess 400. For example, if the data elements are related to experimentcontrol system actions, then the experiment control computer-basedreasoning model trained on that data will control experiment controlsystem. Process 400 proceeds by receiving 410 an experiment controlcomputer-based reasoning model. The process proceeds by receiving 420 acontext. The experiment control computer-based reasoning model is thenused to determine 430 an action to take. The action is then performed bythe control system (e.g., caused by the experiment controlcomputer-based reasoning system). If there are more 450 contexts toconsider, then the system returns to receive 410 those contexts andotherwise ceases 460. In such embodiments, the experiment controlcomputer-based reasoning model may be used to control experiment. Thechosen actions are then performed by a control system.

Control of Energy Transfer Systems

The processes 100, 400 may also be used for control systems for energytransfer. For example, a building may have numerous energy sources,including solar, wind, grid-based electrical, batteries, on-sitegeneration (e.g., by diesel or gas), etc. and may have many operationsit can perform, including manufacturing, computation, temperaturecontrol, etc. The techniques herein may be used to control when certaintypes of energy are used and when certain energy consuming processes areengaged. For example, on sunny days, roof-mounted solar cells mayprovide enough low-cost power that grid-based electrical power isdiscontinued during a particular time period while costly manufacturingprocesses are engaged. On windy, rainy days, the overhead of runningsolar panels may overshadow the energy provided, but power purchasedfrom a wind-generation farm may be cheap, and only essential energyconsuming manufacturing processes and maintenance processes areperformed.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining (e.g.,in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or moredata elements or aspects of the energy transfer system. The surprisalfor the one or more energy transfer system data elements or aspects maybe determined and a determination may be made whether to select orinclude the one or more energy transfer system data elements or aspectsin energy control computer-based reasoning model based on the determinedsurprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets of one or moreenergy transfer system data elements or aspects to assess, the processmay return to determine whether more energy transfer system dataelements or aspects should be included. Once there are no more energytransfer system data elements or aspects to consider, the process canturn to controlling or causing control of the energy transfer systemusing the energy control computer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the energy transfer computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of an energy transfer system using process400. For example, if the data elements are related to energy transfersystem actions, then the energy control computer-based reasoning modeltrained on that data will control energy transfer system. Process 400proceeds by receiving 410 an energy control computer-based reasoningmodel. The process proceeds by receiving 420 a context. The energycontrol computer-based reasoning model is then used to determine 430 anaction to take. The action is then performed by the control system(e.g., caused by the energy control computer-based reasoning system). Ifthere are more 450 contexts to consider, then the system returns toreceive 410 those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In suchembodiments, the energy control computer-based reasoning model may beused to control energy. The chosen actions are then performed by acontrol system.

Health Care Decision Making, Prediction, and Fraud Protection

The processes 100, 400 may also be used for health care decision making,prediction (such as outcome prediction), and fraud detection. Forexample, some health insurers require pre-approval, pre-certification,pre-authorization, and/or reimbursement for certain types of healthcareprocedures, such as healthcare services, administration of drugs,surgery, hospital visits, etc. When analyzing pre-approvals, a healthcare professional must contact the insurer to obtain their approvalprior to administering care, or else the health insurance company maynot cover the procedure. Not all services require pre-approval, but manymay, and which require it can differ among insurers. Health insurancecompanies may make determinations including, but not necessarily limitedto, whether a procedure is medically necessary, whether it isduplicative, whether it follows currently-accepted medical practice,whether there are anomalies in the care or its procedures, whether thereare anomalies or errors with the health care provider or professional,etc.

In some embodiments, a health insurance company may have many “features”of data on which health care pre-approval or reimbursement decisions aredetermined by human operators. These features may include diagnosisinformation, type of health insurance, requesting health careprofessional and facility, frequency and/or last claim of the particulartype, etc. The data on previous decisions can be used to train thecomputer-based reasoning system. The techniques herein may be used toguide the health care decision making process. For example, when thecomputer-based reasoning model determines, with high conviction orconfidence, that a procedure should be pre-approved or reimbursed, itmay pre-approve or reimburse the procedure without further review. Insome embodiments, when the computer-based reasoning model has lowconviction re whether or not to pre-approve a particular procedure, itmay flag it for human review (including, e.g., sending it back to thesubmitting organization for further information). In some embodiments,some or all of the rejections of procedure pre-approval or reimbursementmay be flagged for human review.

Further, in some embodiments, the techniques herein can be used to flagtrends, anomalies, and/or errors. For example, as explained in detailelsewhere herein, the techniques can be used to determine, for example,when there are anomalies for a request for pre-approval, diagnoses,reimbursement requests, etc. with respect to the computer-basedreasoning model trained on prior data. When the anomaly is detected,(e.g., outliers, such as a procedure or prescription has been requestedoutside the normal range of occurrences per time period, for anindividual that is outside the normal range of patients, etc.; and/orwhat may be referred to as “inliers”—or “contextual outliers,” such astoo frequently (or rarely) occurring diagnoses, procedures,prescriptions, etc.), the pre-approval, diagnosis, reimbursementrequest, etc. can be flagged for further review. In some cases, theseanomalies could be errors (e.g., and the health professional or facilitymay be contacted to rectify the error), acceptable anomalies (e.g.,patients that need care outside of the normal bounds), or unacceptableanomalies. Additionally, in some embodiments, the techniques herein canbe used to determine and flag trends (e.g., for an individual patient,set of patients, health department or facility, region, etc.). Thetechniques herein may be useful not only because they can automateand/or flag pre-approval decision, reimbursement requests, diagnosis,etc., but also because the trained computer-based reasoning model maycontain information (e.g., prior decision) from multiple (e.g., 10s,100s, 1000s, or more) prior decision makers. Consideration of this largeamount of information may be untenable for other approaches, such ashuman review.

The techniques herein may also be used to predict adverse outcomes innumerous health care contexts. The computer-based reasoning model may betrained with data from previous adverse events, and perhaps frompatients that did not have adverse events. The trained computer-basedreasoning system can then be used to predict when a current orprospective patient or treatment is likely to cause an adverse event.For example, if a patient arrives at a hospital, the patient'sinformation and condition may be assessed by the computer-basedreasoning model using the techniques herein in order to predict whetheran adverse event is probable (and the conviction of that determination).As a more specific example, if a septuagenarian with a history of lowblood pressure is admitted for monitoring a heart murmur, the techniquesherein may flag that patient for further review. In some embodiments,the determination of a potential adverse outcome may be an indication ofone or more possible adverse events, such as a complication, having anadditional injury, sepsis, increased morbidity, and/or gettingadditionally sick, etc. Returning to the example of the septuagenarianwith a history of low blood pressure, the techniques herein may indicatethat, based on previous data, the possibility of a fall in the hospitalis unduly high (possibly with high conviction). Such information canallow the hospital to try to ameliorate the situation and attempt toprevent the adverse event before it happens.

In some embodiments, the techniques herein include assisting indiagnosis and/or diagnosing patients based on previous diagnosis dataand current patient data. For example, a computer-based reasoning modelmay be trained with previous patient data and related diagnoses usingthe techniques herein. The diagnosis computer-based reasoning model maythen be used in order to suggest one or more possible diagnoses for thecurrent patient. As a more specific example, a septuagenarian maypresent with specific attributes, medical history, family history, etc.This information may be used as the input context to the diagnosiscomputer-based reasoning system, and the diagnosis computer-basedreasoning system may determine one or more possible diagnoses for theseptuagenarian. In some embodiments, those possible diagnoses may thenbe assessed by medical professionals. The techniques herein may be usedto diagnose any condition, including, but not limited to breast cancer,lung cancer, colon cancer, prostate cancer, bone metastases, coronaryartery disease, congenital heart defect, brain pathologies, Alzheimer'sdisease, and/or diabetic retinopathy.

In some embodiments, the techniques herein may be used to generatesynthetic data that mimics, but does not include previous patient data.This synthetic data generation is available for any of the uses of thetechniques described herein (manufacturing, image labelling,self-driving vehicles, etc.), and can be particularly important incircumstances where using user data (such as patient health data) in amodel may be contrary to policy or regulation. As discussed elsewhereherein, the synthetic data can be generated to directly mimic thecharacteristics of the patient population, or more surprising data canbe generated (e.g., higher surprisal) in order to generate more data inthe edge cases, all without a necessity of including actual patientdata.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining (e.g.,in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or moredata elements or aspects of the health care system. The surprisal orconviction for the one or more health care system data elements oraspects may be determined and a determination may be made whether toselect or include the one or more health care system data elements oraspects in a health care system computer-based reasoning model based onthe determined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets ofone or more health care system data elements or aspects to assess, theprocess may return to determine whether more health care system dataelements or aspects should be included. Once there are no more healthcare system data elements or aspects to consider included in the model,the process can turn to controlling or causing control of the healthcare computer-based reasoning system using the health care systemcomputer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the health care system computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of a health care computer-based reasoningsystem using process 400. For example, if the data elements are relatedto health care system actions, then the health care systemcomputer-based reasoning model trained on that data will control thehealth care system. Process 400 proceeds by receiving 410 a health caresystem computer-based reasoning model. The process proceeds by receiving420 a context. The health care system computer-based reasoning model isthen used to determine 430 an action to take. The action is thenperformed by the control system (e.g., caused by the health care systemcomputer-based reasoning system). If there are more 450 contexts toconsider, then the system returns to receive 410 those contexts andotherwise ceases 460. In such embodiments, the health care systemcomputer-based reasoning model may be used to assess health caredecisions, predict outcomes, etc. In some embodiments, the chosenaction(s) are then performed by a control system.

Financial Decision Making, Prediction, and Fraud Protection

The processes 100 and/or 400 may also be used for financial decisionmaking, prediction (such as outcome or performance prediction), and/orfraud detection. For example, some financial systems require approval,certification, authorization, and/or reimbursement for certain types offinancial transactions, such as loans, lines of credit, credit or chargeapprovals, etc. When analyzing approvals, a financial professional maydetermine, as one example, whether to approve prior to loaning money.Not all services or transactions require approval, but many may, andwhich require it can differ among financial system or institutions.Financial transaction companies may make determinations including, butnot necessarily limited to, whether a loan appears to be viable, whethera charge is duplicative, whether a loan, charge, etc. followscurrently-accepted practice, whether there are anomalies associated withthe loan or charge, whether there are anomalies or errors with the anyparty to the loan, etc.

In some embodiments, a financial transaction company may have many“features” of data on which financial system decisions are determined byhuman operators. These features may include credit score, type offinancial transaction (loan, credit card transaction, etc.), requestingfinancial system professional and/or facility (e.g., what bank,merchant, or other requestor), frequency and/or last financialtransaction of the particular type, etc. The data on previous decisionscan be used to train the computer-based reasoning system. The techniquesherein may be used to guide the financial system decision makingprocess. For example, when the computer-based reasoning modeldetermines, with high conviction or confidence, that a financialtransaction should be approved (e.g. with high conviction), it may theapprove the transaction without further review (e.g., by a humanoperator). In some embodiments, when the computer-based reasoning modelhas low conviction re whether or not to approve a particulartransaction, it may flag it for human review (including, e.g., sendingit back to the submitting organization for further information oranalysis). In some embodiments, some or all of the rejections ofapprovals may be flagged for human review.

Further, in some embodiments, the techniques herein can be used to flagtrends, anomalies, and/or errors. For example, as explained in detailelsewhere herein, the techniques can be used to determine, for example,when there are anomalies for a request for approval, etc. with respectto the computer-based reasoning model trained on prior data. When theanomaly is detected, (e.g., outliers, such as a transaction has beenrequested outside the normal range of occurrences per time period, foran individual that is outside the normal range of transactions orapprovals, etc.; and/or what may be referred to as “inliers”—or“contextual outliers,” such as too frequently (or rarely) occurringtypes of transactions or approvals, unusual densities or changes todensities of the data, etc.), the approval may be flagged for furtherreview. In some cases, these anomalies could be errors (e.g., and thefinancial professional or facility may be contacted to rectify theerror), acceptable anomalies (e.g., transactions or approvals arelegitimate, even if outside of the normal bounds), or unacceptableanomalies. Additionally, in some embodiments, the techniques herein canbe used to determine and flag trends (e.g., for an individual customeror financial professional, set of individuals, financial department orfacility, systems, etc.). The techniques herein may be useful not onlybecause they can automate and/or flag approval decisions, transactions,etc., but also because the trained computer-based reasoning model maycontain information (e.g., prior decision) from multiple (e.g., 10s,100s, 1000s, or more) prior decision makers. Consideration of this largeamount of information may be untenable for other approaches, such ashuman review.

In some embodiments, the techniques herein may be used to generatesynthetic data that mimics, but does not include previous financialdata. This synthetic data generation is available for any of the uses ofthe techniques described herein (manufacturing, image labelling,self-driving vehicles, etc.), and can be particularly important incircumstances where using user data (such as financial data) in a modelmay be contrary to contract, policy, or regulation. As discussedelsewhere herein, the synthetic data can be generated to directly mimicthe characteristics of the financial transactions and/or users, or moresurprising data can be generated (e.g., higher surprisal) in order togenerate more data in the edge cases, all without including actualfinancial data.

In some embodiments, processes 100 and/or 400 may include determining(e.g., in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of oneor more data elements or aspects of the financial system. The surprisaland/or conviction for the one or more financial system data elements oraspects may be determined and a determination may be made whether toselect or include the one or more financial system data elements oraspects in a financial system computer-based reasoning model based onthe determined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more sets ofone or more financial system data elements or aspects to assess, theprocess may return to determine whether more financial system dataelements or aspects should be included. Once there are no more financialsystem data elements or aspects to consider included in the model, theprocess can turn to controlling or causing control of the financialsystem computer-based reasoning system using the financial systemcomputer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, processes 100 and/or 400 may determine (e.g., inresponse to a request) synthetic data in the computer-based reasoningmodel for use in the financial system computer-based reasoning model.Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, the process can cause 199control of a financial system computer-based reasoning system usingprocess 400. For example, if the data elements are related to financialsystem actions, then the financial system computer-based reasoning modeltrained on that data will control the financial system. Process 400proceeds by receiving 410 a financial system computer-based reasoningmodel. The process proceeds by receiving 420 a context. The financialsystem computer-based reasoning model is then used to determine 430 anaction to take. The action is then performed by the control system(e.g., caused by the financial system computer-based reasoning system).If there are more 450 contexts to consider, then the system returns toreceive 410 those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In suchembodiments, the financial system computer-based reasoning model may beused to assess financial system decisions, predict outcomes, etc. Insome embodiments, the chosen action(s) are then performed by a controlsystem.

Real Estate Future Value and Valuation Prediction

The techniques herein may also be used for real estate value estimation.For example, the past values and revenue from real estate ventures maybe used as training data. This data may include, in addition to value(e.g., sale or resale value), compound annual growth rate (“CAGR”),zoning, property type (e.g., multifamily, Office, Retail, Industrial),adjacent business and types, asking rent (e.g., rent per square foot(“sqft”) for each of Office, Retail, Industrial, etc. and/or per unit(for multifamily buildings), further, this may be based on allproperties within the selected property type in a particular geography,for example), capitalization rate (or “cap rate” based on all propertieswithin selected property type in a geography), demand (which may bequantified as occupied stock), market capitalization (e.g., an averagemodeled price per sqft multiplied by inventory sqft of the givenproperty type and/or in a given geography), net absorption (net changein demand for a rolling 12 month period), net completions (e.g., netchange in inventory sqft (Office, Retail, Industrial) or units(Multifamily) for a period of time, such as analyzed data element(s)rolling 12 month period), occupancy (e.g., Occupied sqft/total inventorysqft, 100%−vacancy %, etc.), stock (e.g., inventory square footage(Office, Retail, Industrial) or units (Multifamily), revenue (e.g.,revenue generated by renting out or otherwise using a piece of realestate), savings (e.g., tax savings, depreciation), costs (e.g., taxes,insurance, upkeep, payments to property managers, costs for findingstenants, property managers, etc.), geography and geographic location(e.g., views of water, distance to shopping, walking score, proximity topublic transportation, distance to highways, proximity to job centers,proximity to local universities, etc.), building characteristics (e.g.,date built, date renovated, etc.), property characteristics (e.g.,address, city, state, zip, property type, unit type(s), number of units,numbers of bedrooms and bathrooms, square footage(s), lot size(s),assessed value(s), lot value(s), improvements value(s), etc.—possiblyincluding current and past values), real estate markets characteristics(e.g., local year-over-year growth, historical year-over-year growth),broader economic information (e.g., gross domestic product growth,consumer sentiment, economic forecast data), local economic information(e.g., local economic growth, average local salaries and growth, etc.),local demographics (e.g., numbers of families, couples, single people,number of working-age people, numbers or percentage of people with atdifferent education, salary, or savings levels, etc.). The techniquesherein may be used to train a real estate computer-based reasoning modelbased on previous properties. Once the real estate computer-basedreasoning system has been trained, then input properties may be analyzedusing the real estate reasoning system. Using the techniques herein, thesurprisal and/or conviction of the training data can be used to build anreal estate computer-based reasoning system that balances the size ofthe computer-based reasoning model with the information that eachadditional property record (or set of records) provides to the model.

The techniques herein may be used to predict performance of real estatein the future. For example, based on the variables associated discussedhere, that are related, e.g., with various geographies, property types,and markets, the techniques herein may be used to find property typesand geographies with the highest expected value or return (e.g., asCAGR). As a more specific example, a model of historical CAGR withasking rent, capitalization rate, demand, net absorption, netcompletions, occupancy, stock, etc. can be trained. That model may beused, along with more current data, to predict the CAGR of variousproperty types and/or geographies over the coming X years (e.g., 2, 3,5, or 10 years). Such information may be useful for predicting futurevalue for properties and/or automated decision making.

As another example, using the techniques herein, a batch of availableproperties may be given as input to the real estate computer-basedreasoning systems, and the real estate computer-based reasoning systemmay be used to determine what properties are likely to be goodinvestments. In some embodiments, the predictions of the computer-basedreasoning system may be used to purchase properties. Further, asdiscussed extensively herein, explanations may be provided for thedecisions. Those explanation may be used by a controllable system tomake investment decisions and/or by a human operator to review theinvestment predictions.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining thesurprisal and/or conviction of each input real estate data case (ormultiple real estate data cases) with respect to the associated labelsor of the aspects of the computer-based reasoning model. The surprisaland/or conviction for the one or more real estate data cases may bedetermined and a determination may be made whether to select or includethe one or more real estate data cases in the real estate computer-basedreasoning model based on the determined surprisal and/or conviction.While there are more sets of one or more real estate data cases toassess, the process may return to determine whether more real estatedata case sets should be included or whether aspects should be includedand/or changed in the model. Once there are no more training cases toconsider, the process can turn to controlling or causing control ofpredicting real estate investments information for possible use inpurchasing real estate using the real estate computer-based reasoning.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the real estate system computer-basedreasoning model. Based on a model that uses the synthetic data, theprocess can cause 199 control of a real estate system, using, forexample, process 400. For example, the training data elements arerelated to real estate, and the real estate computer-based reasoningmodel trained on that data will determined investment value(s) for realestate data cases (properties) under consideration. These investmentvalues may be any appropriate value, such as CAGR, monthly income,resale value, income or resale value based on refurbishment or newdevelopment, net present value of one or more of the preceding, etc. Insome embodiments, process 400 begins by receiving 410 a real estatecomputer-based reasoning model. The process proceeds by receiving 420properties under consideration for labeling and/or predicting value(s)for the investment opportunity. The real estate computer-based reasoningmodel is then used to determine 430 values for the real estate underconsideration. The prediction(s) for the real estate is (are) then made440. If there are more 450 properties to consider, then the systemreturns to receive 410 data on those properties and otherwise ceases460. In some embodiments, the real estate computer-based reasoning modelmay be used to determine which training properties are “closest” (ormost similar) to the incoming property or property types and/orgeographies predicted as high value. The investment value(s) for theproperties under consideration may then be determined based on the“closest” properties or property types and/or geographies.

Cybersecurity

The processes 100, 400 may also be used for cybersecurity analysis. Forexample, a cybersecurity company or other organization may want toperform threat (or anomalous behavior) analysis, and in particular maywant explanation data associated with the threat or anomalous behavioranalysis (e.g., why was a particular event, user, etc. identified as athreat or not a threat?). The computer-based reasoning model may betrained using known threats/anomalous behavior and features associatedwith those threats or anomalous behavior. Data that represents neither athreat nor anomalous behavior (e.g., non-malicious access attempts,non-malicious emails, etc.) may also be used to train the computer-basedreasoning model. In some embodiments, when a new entity, user, packet,payload, routing attempt, access attempt, log file, etc. is ready forassessment, the features associated with that new entity, user, packet,payload, routing attempt, access attempt, log file, etc. may be used asinput in the trained cybersecurity computer-based reasoning system. Thecybersecurity computer-based reasoning system may then determine thelikelihood that the entity, user, packet, payload, routing attempt,access attempt, pattern in the log file, etc. is or represents a threator anomalous behavior. Further, explanation data, such as a convictionmeasures, training data used to make a decision etc., can be used tomitigate the threat or anomalous behavior and/or be provided to a humanoperator in order to further assess the potential threat or anomalousbehavior.

Any type of cybersecurity threat or anomalous behavior can be analyzedand detected, such as denial of service (DoS), distributed DOS (DDoS),brute-force attacks (e.g., password breach attempts), compromisedcredentials, malware, insider threats, advanced persistent threats,phishing, spear phishing, etc. and/or anomalous traffic volume,bandwidth use, protocol use, behavior of individuals and/or accounts,logfile pattern, access or routing attempt, etc. In some embodiments thecybersecurity threat is mitigated (e.g., access is suspended, etc.)while the threat is escalated to a human operator. As a more specificexample, if an email is received by the email server, the email may beprovided as input to the trained cybersecurity computer-based reasoningmodel. The cybersecurity computer-based reasoning model may indicatethat the email is a potential threat (e.g., detecting and thenindicating that email includes a link to a universal resource locatorthat is different from the universal resource location displayed in thetext of the email). In some embodiments, this email may be automaticallydeleted, may be quarantined, and/or flagged for review.

In some embodiments, processes 100, 400 may include determining (e.g.,in response to a request) the surprisal and/or conviction of one or moredata elements or aspects of the cybersecurity system. The surprisal orconviction for the one or more cybersecurity system data elements oraspects may be determined and a determination may be made whether toselect or include the one or more cybersecurity system data elements oraspects in a cybersecurity system computer-based reasoning model basedon the determined surprisal and/or conviction. While there are more setsof one or more cybersecurity system data elements or aspects to assess,the process may return to determine whether more cybersecurity systemdata elements or aspects should be included. Once there are no morecybersecurity system data elements or aspects to consider, the processcan turn to controlling or causing control of the cybersecuritycomputer-based reasoning system using the cybersecurity systemcomputer-based reasoning model.

In some embodiments, process 100 may determine (e.g., in response to arequest) synthetic data for use in the cybersecurity systemcomputer-based reasoning model. Based on a model that uses the syntheticdata, the process can cause 199 control of a cybersecuritycomputer-based reasoning system using process 400. For example, if thedata elements are related to cybersecurity system actions, then thecybersecurity system computer-based reasoning model trained on that datawill control the cybersecurity system (e.g., quarantine, delete, or flagfor review, entities, data, network traffic, etc.). Process 400 proceedsby receiving 410 a cybersecurity system computer-based reasoning model.The process proceeds by receiving 420 a context. The cybersecuritysystem computer-based reasoning model is then used to determine 430 anaction to take. The action is then performed by the control system(e.g., caused by the cybersecurity system computer-based reasoningsystem). If there are more 450 contexts to consider, then the systemreturns to receive 410 those contexts and otherwise ceases 460. In suchembodiments, the cybersecurity system computer-based reasoning model maybe used to assess cybersecurity threats, etc. In some embodiments, thechosen action(s) are then performed by a control system.

Example Control Hierarchies

In some embodiments, the technique herein may use a control hierarchy tocontrol systems and/or cause actions to be taken (e.g., as part ofcontrolling or causing 199 control of, or causing 440 performance inFIG. 1 and FIG. 4 ). There are numerous example control hierarchies andmany types of systems to control, and hierarchy for vehicle control ispresented below. In some embodiments, only a portion of this controlhierarchy is used. It is also possible to add levels to (or removelevels from) the control hierarchy.

An example control hierarchy for controlling a vehicle could be:

-   -   Primitive Layer—Active vehicle abilities (accelerate,        decelerate), lateral, elevation, and orientation movements to        control basic vehicle navigation    -   Behavior Layer—Programmed vehicle behaviors which prioritize        received actions and directives and prioritize the behaviors in        the action.    -   Unit Layer—Receives orders from command layer, issues        moves/directives to the behavior layer.    -   Command Layers (hierarchical)—Receives orders and gives orders        to elements under its command, which may be another command        layer or unit layer.

Example Data Cases, Data Elements, Contexts, and Operational Situations

In some embodiments, the cases, data cases, or data elements may includecontext data and action data in context-action pairs. Variousembodiments discussed herein may include any of the context data andactions associated with control of systems. For example, context datamay include the state of machines and/or sensors in a manufacturingplant and the actions may include control of parts of the manufacturingsystem (e.g., speed of certain machinery, turning machinery on or off,signaling something for operator review, etc.). Further, cases mayrelate to control of a vehicle, control of a smart voice control, healthsystem, real estate system, image labelling systems, or any of the otherexamples herein. For example, context data may include data related tothe operation of the vehicle, including the environment in which it isoperating, and the actions taken may be of any granularity. Consider anexample of data collected while a driver, Alicia, drives around a city.The collected data could be context and action data where the actionstaken can include high-level actions (e.g., drive to next intersection,exit the highway, take surface roads, etc.), mid-level actions (e.g.,turn left, turn right, change lanes) and/or low-level actions (e.g.,accelerate, decelerate, etc.). The contexts can include any informationrelated to the vehicle (e.g. time until impact with closest object(s),speed, course heading, breaking distances, vehicle weight, etc.), thedriver (pupillary dilation, heart rate, attentiveness, hand position,foot position, etc.), the environment (speed limit and other local rulesof the road, weather, visibility, road surface information, bothtransient such as moisture level as well as more permanent, such aspavement levelness, existence of potholes, etc.), traffic (congestion,time to a waypoint, time to destination, availability of alternateroutes, etc.), and the like. These input data (e.g., context-actionpairs for training a context-based reasoning system or input trainingcontexts with outcome actions for training a machine learning system)can be saved and later used to help control a compatible vehicle in acompatible operational situation. The operational situation of thevehicle may include any relevant data related to the operation of thevehicle. In some embodiments, the operational situation may relate tooperation of vehicles by particular individuals, in particulargeographies, at particular times, and in particular conditions. Forexample, the operational situation may refer to a particular driver(e.g., Alicia or Carole). Alicia may be considered a cautious cardriver, and Carole a faster driver. As noted above, and in particular,when approaching a stop sign, Carole may coast in and then brake at thelast moment, while Alicia may slow down earlier and roll in. As anotherexample of an operational situation, Bob may be considered the “bestpilot” for a fleet of helicopters, and therefore his context and actionsmay be used for controlling self-flying helicopters.

In some embodiments, the operational situation may relate to theenvironment in which the system is operating. In the vehicle context,the locale may be a geographic area of any size or type, and may bedetermined by systems that utilize machine learning. For example, anoperational situation may be “highway driving” while another is “sidestreet driving”. An operational situation may be related to an area,neighborhood, city, region, state, country, etc. For example, oneoperational situation may relate to driving in Raleigh, N.C. and anothermay be driving in Pittsburgh, Pa. An operational situation may relate tosafe or legal driving speeds. For example, one operational situation maybe related to roads with forty-five miles per hour speed limits, andanother may relate to turns with a recommended speed of 20 miles perhour. The operational situation may also include aspects of theenvironment such as road congestion, weather or road conditions, time ofday, etc. The operational situation may also include passengerinformation, such as whether to hurry (e.g., drive faster), whether todrive smoothly, technique for approaching stop signs, red lights, otherobjects, what relative velocity to take turns, etc. The operationalsituation may also include cargo information, such as weight,hazardousness, value, fragility of the cargo, temperature sensitivity,handling instructions, etc.

In some embodiments, the context and action may include systemmaintenance information. In the vehicle context, the context may includeinformation for timing and/or wear-related information for individual orsets of components. For example, the context may include information onthe timing and distance since the last change of each fluid, each belt,each tire (and possibly when each was rotated), the electrical system,interior and exterior materials (such as exterior paint, interiorcushions, passenger entertainment systems, etc.), communication systems,sensors (such as speed sensors, tire pressure monitors, fuel gauges,compasses, global positioning systems (GPS), RADARs, LiDARs, cameras,barometers, thermal sensors, accelerometers, strain gauges, noise/soundmeasurement systems, etc.), the engine(s), structural components of thevehicle (wings, blades, struts, shocks, frame, hull, etc.), and thelike. The action taken may include inspection, preventative maintenance,and/or a failure of any of these components. As discussed elsewhereherein, having context and actions related to maintenance may allow thetechniques to predict when issues will occur with future vehicles and/orsuggest maintenance. For example, the context of an automobile mayinclude the distance traveled since the timing belt was last replaced.The action associated with the context may include inspection,preventative replacement, and/or failure of the timing belt. Further, asdescribed elsewhere herein, the contexts and actions may be collectedfor multiple operators and/or vehicles. As such, the timing ofinspection, preventative maintenance and/or failure for multipleautomobiles may be determined and later used for predictions andmessaging.

Causing performance of an identified action can include causing acontrol system to control the target system based on the identifiedaction. In the self-controlled vehicle context, this may include sendinga signal to a real car, to a simulator of a car, to a system or devicein communication with either, etc. Further, the action to be caused canbe simulated/predicted without showing graphics, etc. For example, thetechniques might cause performance of actions in the manner thatincludes, determining what action would be take, and determining whetherthat result would be anomalous, and performing the techniques hereinbased on the determination that such state would be anomalous based onthat determination, all without actually generating the graphics andother characteristics needed for displaying the results needed in agraphical simulator (e.g., a graphical simulator might be similar to acomputer game).

Numerous other examples of cases, data, contexts and actions arediscussed herein.

Example of Certainty and Conviction

In some embodiments, certainty score is a broad term encompassing itplain and ordinary meaning, including the certainty (e.g., as acertainty function) that a particular set of data fits a model, theconfidence that a particular set of data conforms to the model, or theimportance of a feature or case with regard to the model. Determining acertainty score for a particular case can be accomplished by removingthe particular case from the case-based or computer-based reasoningmodel and determining the conviction score of the particular case basedon an entropy measure associated with adding that particular case backinto the model. Any appropriate entropy measure, variance, confidence,and/or related method can be used for making this determination, such asthe ones described herein. In some embodiments, certainty or convictionis determined by the expected information gain of adding the case to themodel divided by the actual information gain of adding the case. Forexample, in some embodiments, certainty or conviction may be determinedbased on Shannon Entropy, Renyi entropy, Hartley entropy, min entropy,Collision entropy, Renyi divergence, diversity index, Simpson index,Gini coefficient, Kullback-Leibler divergence, Fisher information,Jensen-Shannon divergence, Symmetrised divergence. In some embodiments,certainty scores are conviction scores and are determined by calculatingthe entropy, comparing the ratio of entropies, and/or the like.

In some embodiments, the conviction of a case may be computed based onlooking only at the K nearest neighbors when adding the feature backinto the model. The K nearest neighbors can be determined using anyappropriate distance measure, including use of Euclidean distance,l-Kronecker delta, Minkowski distance, Damerau—Levenshtein distance,and/or any other distance measure, metric, pseudometric, premetric,index, or the like. In some embodiments, influence functions are used todetermine the importance of a feature or case.

In some embodiments, determining certainty or conviction scores caninclude determining the conviction of each feature of multiple featuresof the cases in the computer-based reasoning model. In this context theword “feature” is being used to describe a data field as across all orsome of the cases in the computer-based reasoning model. The word“field,” in this context, is being used to describe the value of anindividual case for a particular feature. For example, a feature for atheoretical computer-based reasoning model for self-driving cars may be“speed”. The field value for a particular case for the feature of speedmay be the actual speed, such as thirty-five miles per hour.

Returning to determining certainty or conviction scores, in someembodiments, determining the conviction of a feature may be accomplishedby removing the feature from the computer-based reasoning model anddetermining a conviction score of the feature based on an entropymeasure associated with adding the feature back into the computer-basedreasoning model. For example, returning to the example above, removing aspeed feature from a self-driving car computer-based reasoning modelcould include removing all of the speed values (e.g., fields) from casesfrom the computer-based reasoning model and determining the convictionof adding speed back into the computer-based reasoning model. Theentropy measure used to determine the conviction score for the featurecan be any appropriate entropy measure, such as those discussed herein.In some embodiments, the conviction of a feature may also be computedbased on looking only at the K nearest neighbors when adding the featureback into the model. In some embodiments, the feature is not actuallyremoved, but only temporarily excluded.

Hardware Overview

According to some embodiments, the techniques described herein areimplemented by one or more special-purpose computing devices. Thespecial-purpose computing devices may be hard-wired to perform thetechniques, or may include digital electronic devices such as one ormore application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) or fieldprogrammable gate arrays (FPGAs) that are persistently programmed toperform the techniques, or may include one or more general purposehardware processors programmed to perform the techniques pursuant toprogram instructions in firmware, memory, other storage, or acombination. Such special-purpose computing devices may also combinecustom hard-wired logic, ASICs, or FPGAs with custom programming toaccomplish the techniques. The special-purpose computing devices may bedesktop computer systems, portable computer systems, handheld devices,networking devices or any other device that incorporates hard-wiredand/or program logic to implement the techniques.

For example, FIG. 3 is a block diagram that illustrates a computersystem 300 upon which an embodiment of the invention may be implemented.Computer system 300 includes a bus 302 or other communication mechanismfor communicating information, and a hardware processor 304 coupled withbus 302 for processing information. Hardware processor 304 may be, forexample, a general purpose microprocessor.

Computer system 300 also includes a main memory 306, such as a randomaccess memory (RAM) or other dynamic storage device, coupled to bus 302for storing information and instructions to be executed by processor304. Main memory 306 also may be used for storing temporary variables orother intermediate information during execution of instructions to beexecuted by processor 304. Such instructions, when stored innon-transitory storage media accessible to processor 304, rendercomputer system 300 into a special-purpose machine that is customized toperform the operations specified in the instructions.

Computer system 300 further includes a read only memory (ROM) 308 orother static storage device coupled to bus 302 for storing staticinformation and instructions for processor 304. A storage device 310,such as a magnetic disk, optical disk, or solid-state drive is providedand coupled to bus 302 for storing information and instructions.

Computer system 300 may be coupled via bus 302 to a display 312, such asan OLED, LED or cathode ray tube (CRT), for displaying information to acomputer user. An input device 314, including alphanumeric and otherkeys, is coupled to bus 302 for communicating information and commandselections to processor 304. Another type of user input device is cursorcontrol 316, such as a mouse, a trackball, or cursor direction keys forcommunicating direction information and command selections to processor304 and for controlling cursor movement on display 312. This inputdevice typically has two degrees of freedom in two axes, a first axis(e.g., x) and a second axis (e.g., y), that allows the device to specifypositions in a plane. The input device 314 may also have multiple inputmodalities, such as multiple 2-axes controllers, and/or input buttons orkeyboard. This allows a user to input along more than two dimensionssimultaneously and/or control the input of more than one type of action.

Computer system 300 may implement the techniques described herein usingcustomized hard-wired logic, one or more ASICs or FPGAs, firmware and/orprogram logic which in combination with the computer system causes orprograms computer system 300 to be a special-purpose machine. Accordingto some embodiments, the techniques herein are performed by computersystem 300 in response to processor 304 executing one or more sequencesof one or more instructions contained in main memory 306. Suchinstructions may be read into main memory 306 from another storagemedium, such as storage device 310. Execution of the sequences ofinstructions contained in main memory 306 causes processor 304 toperform the process steps described herein. In alternative embodiments,hard-wired circuitry may be used in place of or in combination withsoftware instructions.

The term “storage media” as used herein refers to any non-transitorymedia that store data and/or instructions that cause a machine tooperate in a specific fashion. Such storage media may comprisenon-volatile media and/or volatile media. Non-volatile media includes,for example, optical disks, magnetic disks, or solid-state drives, suchas storage device 310. Volatile media includes dynamic memory, such asmain memory 306. Common forms of storage media include, for example, afloppy disk, a flexible disk, hard disk, solid-state drive, magnetictape, or any other magnetic data storage medium, a CD-ROM, any otheroptical data storage medium, any physical medium with patterns of holes,a RAM, a PROM, and EPROM, a FLASH-EPROM, NVRAM, any other memory chip orcartridge.

Storage media is distinct from but may be used in conjunction withtransmission media. Transmission media participates in transferringinformation between storage media. For example, transmission mediaincludes coaxial cables, copper wire and fiber optics, including thewires that comprise bus 302. Transmission media can also take the formof acoustic or light waves, such as those generated during radio-waveand infra-red data communications.

Various forms of media may be involved in carrying one or more sequencesof one or more instructions to processor 304 for execution. For example,the instructions may initially be carried on a magnetic disk orsolid-state drive of a remote computer. The remote computer can load theinstructions into its dynamic memory and send the instructions over atelephone line using a modem. A modem local to computer system 300 canreceive the data on the telephone line and use an infra-red transmitterto convert the data to an infra-red signal. An infra-red detector canreceive the data carried in the infra-red signal and appropriatecircuitry can place the data on bus 302. Bus 302 carries the data tomain memory 306, from which processor 304 retrieves and executes theinstructions. The instructions received by main memory 306 mayoptionally be stored on storage device 310 either before or afterexecution by processor 304.

Computer system 300 also includes a communication interface 318 coupledto bus 302. Communication interface 318 provides a two-way datacommunication coupling to a network link 320 that is connected to alocal network 322. For example, communication interface 318 may be anintegrated services digital network (ISDN) card, cable modem, satellitemodem, or a modem to provide a data communication connection to acorresponding type of telephone line. As another example, communicationinterface 318 may be a local area network (LAN) card to provide a datacommunication connection to a compatible LAN. Wireless links may also beimplemented. In any such implementation, communication interface 318sends and receives electrical, electromagnetic or optical signals thatcarry digital data streams representing various types of information.Such a wireless link could be a Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE),802.11 WiFi connection, or the like.

Network link 320 typically provides data communication through one ormore networks to other data devices. For example, network link 320 mayprovide a connection through local network 322 to a host computer 324 orto data equipment operated by an Internet Service Provider (ISP) 326.ISP 326 in turn provides data communication services through the worldwide packet data communication network now commonly referred to as the“Internet” 328. Local network 322 and Internet 328 both use electrical,electromagnetic or optical signals that carry digital data streams. Thesignals through the various networks and the signals on network link 320and through communication interface 318, which carry the digital data toand from computer system 300, are example forms of transmission media.

Computer system 300 can send messages and receive data, includingprogram code, through the network(s), network link 320 and communicationinterface 318. In the Internet example, a server 330 might transmit arequested code for an application program through Internet 328, ISP 326,local network 322 and communication interface 318.

The received code may be executed by processor 304 as it is received,and/or stored in storage device 310, or other non-volatile storage forlater execution.

In the foregoing specification, embodiments of the invention have beendescribed with reference to numerous specific details that may vary fromimplementation to implementation. The specification and drawings are,accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative rather than a restrictivesense. The sole and exclusive indicator of the scope of the invention,and what is intended by the applicants to be the scope of the invention,is the literal and equivalent scope of the set of claims that issue fromthis application, in the specific form in which such claims issue,including any subsequent correction.

1.-20. (canceled)
 21. A method comprising: receiving a request forgeneration of synthetic data based on a set of training data cases;determining one or more conditions for the synthetic data; for eachsynthetic data case in the synthetic data, for each undetermined featurein the synthetic data case, determining one or more focal training datacases from among the set of training data cases based at least in parton the one or more conditions and any already-determined value forfeatures in the synthetic data case; determining a value for theundetermined feature in the synthetic data case based at least in parton the focal training data cases; using the value for the undeterminedfeature in the synthetic data case; continuing to determine undeterminedfeatures until there are no more undetermined features; providing acomputer-based reasoning model for control of a controllable system,wherein the computer-based reasoning model that was determined at leastin part based on the synthetic data cases in the synthetic data; whereinthe method is performed by one or more computing devices.
 22. The methodof claim 21, wherein determining one or more conditions for thesynthetic data comprises determining a previous-in-time value for theundetermined feature, and determining the one or more focal trainingdata cases comprises determining the one or more focal training datacases from among the set of training data cases conditioned at least inpart on any already-determined value for features in the synthetic datacase and on the previous-in-time value for the undetermined feature. 23.The method of claim 21, wherein determining one or more conditions forthe synthetic data comprises determining a value for analready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, anddetermining the one or more focal training data cases comprisesdetermining the one or more focal training data cases from among the setof training data cases conditioned at least in part on thealready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, and ona value for a feature in the synthetic data case other than theundetermined feature.
 24. The method of claim 21, wherein determiningone or more conditions for the synthetic data comprises determining avalue for a feature in the synthetic data case, and determining the oneor more focal training data cases comprises determining the one or morefocal training data cases from among the set of training data casesconditioned at least in part on any already-determined value forfeatures in the synthetic data case, and on one or more previous-in-timevalues for the undetermined feature and the value for the feature in thesynthetic data case.
 25. The method of claim 21, wherein determining oneor more conditions for the synthetic data comprises determining two ormore previous-in-time values for the undetermined feature anddetermining the one or more focal training data cases comprisesdetermining the one or more focal training data cases from among the setof training data cases conditioned at least in part on anyalready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, and onthe two or more previous-in-time values for the undetermined feature.26. The method of claim 21, further comprising determining a uniqueidentifier from a table in the set of training data cases and whereindetermining one or more conditions for the synthetic data comprisesdetermining the one or more conditions based on the unique identifierand determining the one or more focal training data cases comprisesdetermining the one or more focal training data cases from among the setof training data cases conditioned at least in part on anyalready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, and onthe unique identifier.
 27. The method of claim 21, further comprisingdetermining one or more preserved feature values from the set oftraining data cases and wherein determining one or more conditions forthe synthetic data comprises determining the one or more conditionsbased on the one or more preserved feature values and determining theone or more focal training data cases comprises determining the one ormore focal training data cases from among the set of training data casesconditioned at least in part on any already-determined value forfeatures in the synthetic data case, and on the one or more preservedfeature values.
 28. The method of claim 27, further comprising:determining a set of links among database tables from the set oftraining cases, wherein the links represent overlap of correspondingvalues from database table to database table; and determining the one ormore conditions at least in part based on the set of links among thedatabase tables.
 29. The method of claim 21, further comprising causingcontrol of the controllable system using the computer-based reasoningmodel that was determined at least in part based on the synthetic datacases in the synthetic data.
 30. The method of claim 21, furthercomprising determining a unique identifier from a table in the set oftraining data cases and wherein determining the one or more focaltraining data cases comprises determining the one or more focal trainingdata cases from among the set of training data cases conditioned atleast in part on any already-determined value for features in thesynthetic data case, on the unique identifier, and a value for a featurein the synthetic data case.
 31. The method of claim 21, whereindetermining the value for the undetermined feature in the synthetic datacase comprises: determining the value for the undetermined feature inthe synthetic data case based at least in part on a distributionassociated with the undetermined feature in the focal training datacases.
 32. The method of claim 21, further comprising: determining afitness score for the synthetic data case; when the fitness score forthe synthetic data case is beyond a particular threshold, using thesynthetic data case in the synthetic data.
 33. The method of claim 21,further comprising: determining a shortest distance between thesynthetic data case and cases in the set of training data cases; whenthe shortest distance between the synthetic data case and the cases inthe set of training data cases is beyond a particular threshold, usingthe synthetic data case in the synthetic data.
 34. The method of claim21, further comprising: determining distances between the synthetic datacase and at least two cases in the set of training data cases;determining whether there are at least a certain number (k) of trainingdata cases that have a distance to the synthetic data case that is belowa threshold; when there are at least k training data cases havedistances to the synthetic data case that are below the threshold, usingthe synthetic data case in the synthetic data.
 35. The method of claim21, further comprising: determining distances between the synthetic datacase and at least two cases in the set of training data cases;determining whether there are at least a certain number (k) of trainingdata cases that have a distance to the synthetic data case that is belowa first threshold; determining whether any of the set of training datacases have a distance below a second threshold; when there are at leastk training data cases have distances to the synthetic data case that arebelow the first threshold and no training data case has a distance tothe synthetic data case that is below the second threshold, using thesynthetic data case in the synthetic data.
 36. A non-transitory computerreadable medium storing instructions which, when executed by one or morecomputing devices, cause the one or more computing devices to perform aprocess of: receiving a request for generation of synthetic data basedon a set of training data cases; determining one or more conditions forthe synthetic data; for each synthetic data case in the synthetic data,for each undetermined feature in the synthetic data case, determiningone or more focal training data cases from among the set of trainingdata cases based at least in part on the one or more conditions and anyalready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case;determining a value for the undetermined feature in the synthetic datacase based at least in part on the focal training data cases; using thevalue for the undetermined feature in the synthetic data case; continueto determine undetermined features until there are no more undeterminedfeatures; providing a computer-based reasoning model for control of acontrollable system, wherein the computer-based reasoning model that wasdetermined at least in part based on the synthetic data cases in thesynthetic data.
 37. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim36, wherein determining one or more conditions for the synthetic datacomprises determining a previous-in-time value for the undeterminedfeature, and determining the one or more focal training data casescomprises determining the one or more focal training data cases fromamong the set of training data cases conditioned at least in part on anyalready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case and onthe previous-in-time value for the undetermined feature.
 38. Thenon-transitory computer readable medium of claim 36, wherein determiningone or more conditions for the synthetic data comprises determining avalue for an already-determined value for features in the synthetic datacase, and determining the one or more focal training data casescomprises determining the one or more focal training data cases fromamong the set of training data cases conditioned at least in part on thealready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, and ona value for a feature in the synthetic data case other than theundetermined feature.
 39. The non-transitory computer readable medium ofclaim 36, the process further comprising causing control of thecontrollable system using the computer-based reasoning model that wasdetermined at least in part based on the synthetic data cases in thesynthetic data.
 40. A system for performing a machine-executed operationinvolving instructions, wherein said instructions are instructionswhich, when executed by one or more computing devices, cause performanceof a process comprising: receiving a request for generation of syntheticdata based on a set of training data cases; determining one or moreconditions for the synthetic data; for each synthetic data case in thesynthetic data, for each undetermined feature in the synthetic datacase, determining one or more focal training data cases from among theset of training data cases based at least in part on the one or moreconditions and any already-determined value for features in thesynthetic data case; determining a value for the undetermined feature inthe synthetic data case based at least in part on the focal trainingdata cases; using the value for the undetermined feature in thesynthetic data case; continue to determine undetermined features untilthere are no more undetermined features; providing a computer-basedreasoning model for control of a controllable system, wherein thecomputer-based reasoning model that was determined at least in partbased on the synthetic data cases in the synthetic data.
 41. The systemof claim 40, wherein determining one or more conditions for thesynthetic data comprises determining a previous-in-time value for theundetermined feature, and determining the one or more focal trainingdata cases comprises determining the one or more focal training datacases from among the set of training data cases conditioned at least inpart on any already-determined value for features in the synthetic datacase and on the previous-in-time value for the undetermined feature. 42.The system of claim 40, wherein determining one or more conditions forthe synthetic data comprises determining a value for analready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, anddetermining the one or more focal training data cases comprisesdetermining the one or more focal training data cases from among the setof training data cases conditioned at least in part on thealready-determined value for features in the synthetic data case, and ona value for a feature in the synthetic data case other than theundetermined feature.
 43. The system of claim 40, the process furthercomprising causing control of the controllable system using thecomputer-based reasoning model that was determined at least in partbased on the synthetic data cases in the synthetic data.